Ponderbox

The place for speaking your mind on current goings-on in F1
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Ponderbox

Post by mario »

So, with the calendar already due to increase to 21 races next year, Liberty Media have now said that they are looking to expand the calendar even further from 2019 onwards. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-b ... 19-913656/

However, at the same time they have said that they also want to try and avoid clashing with other major events - not just motorsport events, such as the 24 Hours of Le Mans, but also events like the finals at Wimbledon - whilst simultaneously trying to maintain some sort of break in the summer and also avoiding having too many back to back races.

It does beg the question of where they are going to fit those races in if they want to expand the calendar - there have been rumours that they want to expand the calendar up to around 25 or 26 races - especially if Ross Brawn also gets his way of having an annual non-championship race on top of that to enable them to experiment with new concepts. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-motor ... SKBN1683W5

As it stands, the calendar already runs from March through to the end of November and already has a few back to back races. The only way that I can see them expanding the calendar that far whilst maintaining a reasonable gap between the races would be to effectively get rid of winter testing and effectively extend the championship so it lasts for an entire calendar year.

I wonder, though, if the fan base will be that receptive to the idea - whilst a long season might be reasonably appealing if there is a decent contest throughout the season, if they ended up in a situation where one team was to dominate then I could see viewer fatigue setting in quite quickly.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6860
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Ataxia »

I worry more about the families. The long time away for all of those involved with the F1 circus must put tremendous strain on relationships and marriages, and FOM/FIA would have to mandate something like dividing race teams up into two to lessen the tension.

Those calendar plans read like the leaked Brexit memo of "have cake and eat it". Personally, I think the calendar needs to be hacked back to 16-17 races, but with improving the overall promotion and content of the weekend to make each GP seem more like an "event". Having T-Swift at the US GP last year was a massive boon for ticket sales, and it's a model that can be transferred elsewhere.

F1 doesn't have the same insanity factor as say, NASCAR, so probably can't get away with having massive amounts of races!
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
Spectoremg
Posts: 513
Joined: 27 Dec 2014, 21:39
Location: Portsmouth, Hampshire, UK

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Spectoremg »

Any non championship race would be treated like friendlies in football - no one would take them seriously.
User avatar
dinizintheoven
Posts: 3982
Joined: 09 Dec 2010, 01:24

Re: Ponderbox

Post by dinizintheoven »

Random Ponderbox Thought Number One:

https://twitter.com/alo_oficial/status/ ... 1677502465

"This media may contain sensitive material." What is it that could possibly be so triggering that Twitter have to hide it?

...it's an MP4-30, enough to give any McLaren fan nightmares for the next 30 years at least.


Random Ponderbox Thought Number Two:

What was it about Ayrton Senna that made him drop syllables on the end of (usually) English words? For instance, this is how he would have described a certain moustache-wielding Finn with not quite as much power at his disposal:

Ayrton Senna wrote:Kek did not have the abilit to pass me.


Lines like this are liberally scattered all over the 1985 season review video, where the drivers commentated on the race reviews. Was this just him, or is it a general affliction with native Portuguese speakers? I can't ever remember hearing this from Rubens Barrichello, Felipe Massa or any other Brazilian who was frequently interviewed.
James Allen, on his favourite F1 engine of all time:
"...the Life W12, I can't describe the noise to you, but imagine filling your dustbin with nuts and bolts, and then throwing it down the stairs, it was something akin to that!"
User avatar
AdrianBelmonte_
Posts: 804
Joined: 30 Nov 2014, 12:53
Location: Moderdonia (google it)
Contact:

Re: Ponderbox

Post by AdrianBelmonte_ »

Ayrton Senna wrote:Kek did not have the abilit to pass me.


This confirms Ayrton was an usual 4chan visitor...
#FoxesFansHooligans

#HaasShouldBeSoLucky
User avatar
dinizintheoven
Posts: 3982
Joined: 09 Dec 2010, 01:24

Re: Ponderbox

Post by dinizintheoven »

I was wondering how long it would be before someone brought that up.
James Allen, on his favourite F1 engine of all time:
"...the Life W12, I can't describe the noise to you, but imagine filling your dustbin with nuts and bolts, and then throwing it down the stairs, it was something akin to that!"
User avatar
Aislabie
Posts: 1941
Joined: 14 Feb 2016, 11:06

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Aislabie »

A few shower-thoughts about how Formula One could be slightly re-organised:

Maybe they could do qualifying like that...
I kinda miss the old one-lap qualifying sessions. I liked the way that every driver had their moment in the sun, and that every now and again they would mess the grid up because someone cut a corner, or missed a braking point and shot down the grid.

The reason this came to mind is because I was watching a Forza video earlier where someone was doing a hot lap from a standing start on the grid. My brain started thinking about how that might change F1 qualifying. For their qualifying lap, the driver must start in pole position in the grid, then make the fastest lap of the circuit they can. They also have to start the race on their qualifying tyres. This should create the following variables:
- Some drivers might get away poorly from the line.
- Drivers may have different wheels on their wagons.
- With only one flying lap, some drivers will be braver than others.
- One mistake is crucial.

The wilder grids and maybe also strategies, coupled with us being able to watch every driver and compare them (and their machinery), could really spice things up and make Sundays more interesting without reducing the grid to a complete luck based lottery.

That said...
I'd quite like it if there were random grids. Sue me.

Monaco - what's the point?
It's just a fact of life that Monaco has become a bit of a shite race. So get it off the calendar.

It doesn't provide the spectacle of racing for the viewers. Nobody could overtake unless they were clearly and significantly better (see Perez vs Stroll). It's also not a relevant challenge compared to the rest of the championship races.

It doesn't even pay the same race hosting fee. Tbh, I just think it'd be improved by being a non-championship race. even if Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull risk being the only ones who turn up.
User avatar
Bobby Doorknobs
Posts: 4059
Joined: 30 Jul 2014, 17:52
Location: In a safe place.

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Bobby Doorknobs »

Aislabie wrote:Monaco - what's the point?
It's just a fact of life that Monaco has become a bit of a shite race. So get it off the calendar.

It doesn't provide the spectacle of racing for the viewers. Nobody could overtake unless they were clearly and significantly better (see Perez vs Stroll). It's also not a relevant challenge compared to the rest of the championship races.

It doesn't even pay the same race hosting fee. Tbh, I just think it'd be improved by being a non-championship race. even if Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull risk being the only ones who turn up.

I've felt compelled to voice my disagreement, and I'm sorry for the rather long response.

Now, I'm not going to pretend that Monaco is a place where side-by-side racing is anywhere near common and where there are fifty on-track passes per race. In fact, Monaco hasn't had a particularly great passing spot since they got rid of the Gasworks Hairpin over forty years ago. But you know what? That's fine. There are nearly twenty other venues where passing is possible, even with the current aero regs (though DRS has played its part).

As a two-hour race, this year's Grand Prix didn't hold my attention for every single moment, but then neither did Indy, and yet I can say I loved watching the latter. What did hold my attention (with exceptions that are probably too obvious to state) were the barrier-rattling lines drivers drivers took through the Swimming Pool and the pit strategies. I can honestly say that seeing Vettel put in those times during the pit stop phase and ultimately come out in front of Raikkonen was, to me, pretty exciting in its own way and, to be honest, I don't care if I was the only one who thought so. To me, a race decided pretty much entirely on pit strategy can be interesting in itself. I acknowledge that it's not that way for everyone and if it was the norm, I too might have a problem, but it isn't quite that way.

Ask a driver which race he wants to win the most. The answer you're most likely to get is either their home race or Monaco. Why? Two reasons: It's attained a level of prestige that no other race has (whether we give a toss about history or not) and it's a goddamn tough place to drive around. Look at the recent fan survey. One of the most important races in the opinions of most respondents was Monaco. Now, some people here could argue "but those so-called fans are all a bunch of plebs who don't know shite and probably whinge about the engines" or whatever elitist crap that I'm frankly sick of reading, but arguing for Monaco to be axed because passing is difficult (not impossible, but it is close to that, I'll grant you) seems equally self-serving.

You could certainly argue, and are perfectly welcome to argue, that having Monaco on the calendar for its historical value and the value attributed to it by drivers is superficial, but to me, an overtake-fest is just as superficial. In the end, it can be said that the sport's status as an entertainment product is founded on the illusion that it's more important than it really is, but then the same can be said for a lot of things in life, and perhaps that's a debate we shouldn't be having here...

Basically, Monaco is one race in twenty. It's a different kind of challenge. Same with other tracks people seem so eager to get rid of (Monza). If you're not entertained by them, that's totally fine, but there are some among us who enjoy them for different, possibly simpler, possibly hard to comprehend, reasons. Is that wrong? Of course not. Each one of us has a totally different experience of the world. That's life. There's no single right way to enjoy F1.

As with everything I tend to say, there's probably something I forgot to mention and a poorly expressed argument or two in the above, but I think I've said what I wanted to say.

On an unrelated note (at least vis-a-vis Monaco), I actually kind of agree on one-lap qualifying. Everybody getting their moment in the spotlight plus the higher stakes involved is somewhat appealing to me. Although at the same time I do really like this post-2005 system...

EDIT: AustralianStig's compromise below: Also good. ;)
#FreeGonzo
User avatar
AustralianStig
Posts: 1206
Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 00:26
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: Ponderbox

Post by AustralianStig »

Aislabie wrote:I kinda miss the old one-lap qualifying sessions. I liked the way that every driver had their moment in the sun, and that every now and again they would mess the grid up because someone cut a corner, or missed a braking point and shot down the grid.

I love the current quali format, but I know what you mean. So here's a compromise...

Keep the existing quali knockout format as is, but drivers can only do one timed lap in each session.
Join the GP Rejects league at Fantasy F1: https://fantasy.formula1.com/join/?=2a1f25

CoopsII wrote:
Biscione wrote:To the surprise of no-one, Daniil Kvyat wins ROTR for Sochi, by a record margin that may not be surpassed for some time.

I always knew Marko read this forum.
yannicksamlad
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 644
Joined: 19 May 2014, 11:16

Re: Ponderbox

Post by yannicksamlad »

AustralianStig wrote:
Aislabie wrote:I kinda miss the old one-lap qualifying sessions. I liked the way that every driver had their moment in the sun, and that every now and again they would mess the grid up because someone cut a corner, or missed a braking point and shot down the grid.

I love the current quali format, but I know what you mean. So here's a compromise...

Keep the existing quali knockout format as is, but drivers can only do one timed lap in each session.


I too liked the old one-lap sessions with the extra jeopardy of making an error, or the wind changing etc.. but with only 20 cars and fast laptimes it might also be a bit short. And just limiting laps in the current format might make 'empty track ' time increase .. So maybe the one-lap one-shot sequential format, with the running order decided by a 15 minute free-for-all, everyone on track , slowest goes first in the one-lap runs that determine the grid? Should still be an hour of track action ..with some jeopardy for people making mistakes ( and not jeopardy that you get now from someone else triggering a yellow flag)
I started supporting Emmo in 1976 (3 points )....missed 75, 74, 73, 72...
User avatar
dr-baker
Posts: 15428
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:30
Location: Here and there.

Re: Ponderbox

Post by dr-baker »

My opinion is basically what Simtek said. Plus...

Aislabie wrote:It's also not a relevant challenge compared to the rest of the championship races.

The whole point to me is that each race is a different challenge. That's why I loved Monaco being on the same calendar as Monza and the old Hockenheimring. And isn't that why so many people are against Tilkedromes, because of the ubiquity of them all? It may be anachronistic, but that's the whole damn point.

And the reason that they pay no race hosting fee? Because they can. Because even Bernie saw the value of the race was worth more than any race fee. Otherwise, why would Bernie have bothered?
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
dinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
MCard LOLA
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Ponderbox

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

This quali format is the best thing we've ever had. Although I do like the one hour, four laps for the simplicity, and if it returned (for some reason) that wouldn't bother me. I don't like one at a time because of the unfairness. Setting the order by a fully open session causes other problems, and besides, it's just less unfair. And yes, yellow flags are frustrating, but at least (this phrase again) it's the same for everyone....

And don't do a qualifying race either. If that happened I would just not watch the qualifying for the qualifying because it wouldn't feel important enough. (Practice sessions are different because they know they don't matter.)

If Monaco ever gets removed, it should only be because of it finally being too much for an increasingly safety-concerned world, and it should be replaced with another street circuit that'll inevitably leave us feeling empty and wishing it was Monaco. Could Pau be adapted? I don't know. Probably not. That's another subject. To agree with dr-baker, here's some copyright infringement of my favourite F1 book.

Christoper Hilton wrote:Once upon a time the drivers were complaining about the manhole covers at Detroit and it made Ken Tyrrell angry because, he said volubly, if you want to call yourself World Champion you have to be able to drive in the wet as well as the dry, Hockenheim as well as Monaco, Silverstone's broad acres and Adelaide's rectangles – and negotiate a few manhole covers as well.

(Originally I had the following paragraph as well, but I scared myself. The point is that Monaco provides a challenge nowhere else on the calendar does (to say the least), and if we don't have a variety of challenges, how can we call it the World Championship.)

Besides, we all know the first track that should go is Sochi. Not that that'll ever happen, because money is more important than an actual exciting track... not that it hasn't been that way for most of F1 history.

Here's what we need: cars that can follow each other. That's it. That's why we're all so grumpy, anyway. It's like how F1 keeps trying to reinvent itself to appeal to broad audiences when everyone knows the reason for the loss of popularity is the move to pay television. Cars that can't follow is our pay television, we're falling into the same trap that we like to mock them for.

I think at some point I forgot what I was talking about. Maybe I just need to do a good track ranking or something and that'll let me get my opinion urges out. But I couldn't even do that. How do you compare Gilles Villeneuve and Silverstone? I could only do tiers, not individual rankings. And for every track I want to remove, I should be able to name one I want more, because I'm one of those people who doesn't mind having a ton of races.

Everyone says the 2010s won't be nostalgic. But I started watching in 2009 and I've rather enjoyed F1, and in twenty years I'll be complaining how everything isn't like the 2010s. This is the designated decade that'll be absolutely classic to me and sometimes I feel like I haven't been appreciating it like that. Okay, now I'm really off-topic. But that's what the Ponderbox is all about, right.
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
User avatar
Aislabie
Posts: 1941
Joined: 14 Feb 2016, 11:06

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Aislabie »

To come back and answer some comments on my previous points...

The Monaco Grand Prix
I do see the value of a varied calendar for determining a deserving World Champion - I'd also like to see an oval race or two on the calendar, but maybe that's just me - but my issue is that Formula One has entirely outgrown Monaco. The cars are (I think) bigger than they've ever been, faster than they've ever been and more powerful than they've ever been, aside from that Benetton-BMW behemoth in qualifying trim. It pains me a bit because Monaco qualifying is the best of the year by far as the drivers push boundaries that are literal armco barriers as opposed to painted lines, but the race itself has descended into a procession.

It's not the only race that's a procession, but it's also the showpiece event of the World Championship. It is F1's shop window, and I can scarcely remember a dry Monaco GP that would have sold the sport to new fans.

The race has its history, and its place on the calendar (forgive my poor choice of words earlier on that one) but I don't think it has its place in the World Championship. If you want it to be a glamorous anachronism, then it should be allowed to do so in its own right as a stand-alone event. Although not a perfect replacement in terms of history, I see Singapore as just a better Monaco. And entirely see how many of the same things I've thrown at Monaco could also be thrown at Singapore, but I'm a human, not a rational judge.

Also completely agree with whomever posted about Sochi though - I'll accept Monaco forever as long as we can be rid of the bloody thing.

- - -

On The Qualifying Format
The reasons for my wanting to see one-lap qualifying back are threefold really.
  1. Guaranteed TV time for every team's sponsors. Seriously, when was the last time we saw a Sauber on telly that wasn't in a wall?
  2. Mixed up grids - Yes it's artificial, but better that than success ballast or something to try to bring all the cars to the same level.
  3. This lap right here. If only they'd actually started with that grid...

I do agree that the current qualifying session is arguably the best we've ever had though, certainly in terms of the balance between quali and the race as respective spectacles. There's a strong argument for not changing it.

Maybe this would be another thing to trial at Ross Brawn's fabled non-Championship race?

- - -

When all is said and done, I can't put it better than this though:
UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Here's what we need: cars that can follow each other. That's it. That's why we're all so grumpy, anyway. It's like how F1 keeps trying to reinvent itself to appeal to broad audiences when everyone knows the reason for the loss of popularity is the move to pay television. Cars that can't follow is our pay television, we're falling into the same trap that we like to mock them for.


I'm guilty.

I also wish we had first-generation GP2 cars.
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Ponderbox

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

Once upon a time, the 2010 points system was going to look like this:
25-20-15-10-8-6-5-3-2-1.
This is a bit of a weird system; the gaps from 1st to 4th are all equal, and the gap from 6th to 7th is less than 7th to 8th. For a system where ten score, the mid-points positions aren't worth as much as you'd expect. I think this was around the time a medals-then-points system was also being considered, so maybe it all has to do with that. But that's speculation.

Anyway, Mark Wessel's site has a section that lets you apply whatever point system to an F1 season's results table, so what if this had been used?
*The situation with the 2010 Abu Dhabi GP doesn't really change.
*2011 was obviously far too dominated a season for the specific points system to matter as far as the championship goes. Although Alonso does beat Webber, quite comfortably in fact.
*In 2012, Alonso wins by eight points! He had two more second places than Vettel, so it isn't surprising. Although Vettel does win by one point with the 2003 system.
*In 2013, Räikkönen swapping with Hamilton is the highest change in terms of drivers. Ferrari beat Mercedes by four points.
*If Rosberg wins the 2014 Abu Dhabi GP, Hamilton has to come second to take the championship. Not that different, really.... (Edit: forgot about double points. Hamilton needs to win with double points.)
*Don't have that much to say about 2015.
*In the 2016 Abu Dhabi GP, Hamilton just needs Rosberg to drop one position instead of two, but otherwise the meaning of Malaysia onward doesn't change.
*No big changes for this year so far.

I don't really have a point. I guess "the points system usually doesn't make a difference, but sometimes it does", but we already know that. This just didn't have enough stuff to justify its own thread so I made it a Ponderbox post.
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
User avatar
Aislabie
Posts: 1941
Joined: 14 Feb 2016, 11:06

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Aislabie »

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:I don't really have a point. I guess "the points system usually doesn't make a difference, but sometimes it does", but we already know that. This just didn't have enough stuff to justify its own thread so I made it a Ponderbox post.

Under the MotoGP points system, Fernando Alonso is a four-times World Champion:

2005
Fernando Alonso - 341 points
Kimi Raikkonen - 300 points
Michael Schumacher - 180 points

2006
Fernando Alonso - 339 points
Michael Schumacher - 313 points
Felipe Massa - 231 points

2007 (so near, yet so far)
Kimi Raikkonen - 288 points
Lewis Hamilton - 288 points
Fernando Alonso - 286 points

2010
Fernando Alonso - 279 points
Mark Webber - 274 points
Sebastian Vettel - 272 points

2012
Fernando Alonso - 304 points
Sebastian Vettel - 303 points
Kimi Raikkonen - 248 points

All in all, from 2005 to 2013 his results are:
2005 - Champion (341 points, 7 wins)
2006 - Champion (339 points, 7 wins)
2007 - 3rd (286 points, 4 wins)
2008 - 6th (189 points, 2 wins)
2009 - 10th (114 points)
2010 - Champion (279 points, 5 wins)
2011 - 3rd (282 points, 1 win)
2012 - Champion (304 points, 3 wins)
2013 - Runner-Up (273 points, 1 win)

With those numbers, the argument for his being the best driver on the grid becomes all the clearer. Inarguably, he's better than the two Championships he won.
User avatar
CoopsII
Posts: 4673
Joined: 15 Dec 2011, 09:33
Location: Starkiller Base Debris

Re: Ponderbox

Post by CoopsII »

According to Planet Funk, sorry, PlanetF1, Force India are weighing up a change of moniker.

http://www.planetf1.com/news/force-india-name-change-on-the-cards/

Does anybody have any suggestions? I've already posted my suggestion of "Racey McRace Face". No response yet.
Just For One Day...
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Ponderbox

Post by mario »

CoopsII wrote:According to Planet Funk, sorry, PlanetF1, Force India are weighing up a change of moniker.

http://www.planetf1.com/news/force-india-name-change-on-the-cards/

Does anybody have any suggestions? I've already posted my suggestion of "Racey McRace Face". No response yet.

There had been a rumour a while ago that the team was looking at a naming deal with the Brabham family that would see the team renamed as Brabham, though that seems to have gone quiet in more recent times.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2624
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Wallio »

mario wrote:
CoopsII wrote:According to Planet Funk, sorry, PlanetF1, Force India are weighing up a change of moniker.

http://www.planetf1.com/news/force-india-name-change-on-the-cards/

Does anybody have any suggestions? I've already posted my suggestion of "Racey McRace Face". No response yet.

There had been a rumour a while ago that the team was looking at a naming deal with the Brabham family that would see the team renamed as Brabham, though that seems to have gone quiet in more recent times.


Thats for when Bernie buys Sauber :D
Professional Historian/Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"He makes the move on the outside, and knowing George as we do, he's probably on the radio right now telling the team how great he is." - James Hinchcliffe on George Russell
User avatar
dr-baker
Posts: 15428
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:30
Location: Here and there.

Re: Ponderbox

Post by dr-baker »

CoopsII wrote:According to Planet Funk, sorry, PlanetF1, Force India are weighing up a change of moniker.

http://www.planetf1.com/news/force-india-name-change-on-the-cards/

Does anybody have any suggestions? I've already posted my suggestion of "Racey McRace Face". No response yet.

Courtney Force?
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
dinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
MCard LOLA
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Ponderbox

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

So I looked at everyone who got a top two championship finish in GP2 (and FR3.5 from 2011 to 2014) to see if the "fewer years means better chance of success in other series" idea held up.

1 year
Nico Rosberg: World Champion.
Heikki Kovalainen: 7th overall first two years, afterwards not much in the way of success.
Lewis Hamilton: World Champion ×3.
Nico Hülkenberg: Great 2013, but never did quite enough over a sustained period to get with a top team. In 2016 his teammate beat him, so he changed teams Vettel-style.
Antonio Giovinazzi: He's a bit better than Ericsson, but isn't everyone? I wish third driver roles meant anything these days. We'll probably see about him at some point.

Jean-Éric Vergne: When Red Bull had to pick someone, he lost to Ricciardo. Still deserves to be in F1, but so does everyone else in FE.
Robin Frijns: Told Red Bull to bathplug off twice. He unfortunately fell in the window between when things became "have a sponsor or a team who already likes you or it doesn't matter how good you are" and when everyone realised it.
Pierre Gasly: Still waiting for Kvyat to be kicked out. His driving personally excites me, though.

Overall: A couple world champions, some not-quite-top drivers, and a couple yet to be determined.

2 years
Nelson Piquet Jr.: Got a podium one time, but mostly known for Singapore.
Timo Glock: 10th overall first two years (out of GP2), afterwards Kovalainen but the same. Like, the same.
Lucas di Grassi: After three consecutive podium finishes, he got his shot against Glock. And yeah, he failed.
Bruno Senna: Never did anything to make anyone miss him.
Sergio Pérez: Started out alternating bad and good years, nowadays in a never-ending titanic battle with Carlos Sainz to be considered best of the rest.
Stoffel Vandoorne: He's in a McLaren and his teammate's Alonso, but still, ouch.

Robert Wickens: Denied access.
Kevin Magnussen: He's somewhere between Jenson Button and Jolyon Palmer. That's helpful, isn't it?
Carlos Sainz Jr.: Compared poorly against Verstappen and well against Kvyat, but it wasn't extreme enough for him to change status in either following off-season. He'll never get picked for something before Verstappen, so maybe if Ricciardo completely collapses, he can make it to Red Bull and redeem himself? And that isn't even considering the Haas drivers and Pérez also looking at top seats. Discarded junior driver (like Vergne) or perma-midfield (like Hülkenberg) seem the most likely fates.

Overall: A diverse spectrum from upper-midfield to backmarker, but no one sticking in a top team.

3 years
Vitaly Petrov: He got that podium once. Frankly, that's all he deserved.
Sam Bird: Denied access.

Overall: What a sample size. I can't do anything with this.

4 years
Giorgio Pantano: Denied access.
Pastor Maldonado: Never that great. Remembered for his Gethin-esque career results and crashing a lot.
Luiz Razia: Denied access.
Fabio Leimer: Denied access.
Jolyon Palmer: Unimpressive in 2016, desperately slow in 2017 so far.

Overall: Pantano, Maldonado, and Palmer. Sans Pantano if you want to consider him a two-year driver. Either way, unimpressive, but not that many of them either.

5 years
Luca Filippi: Denied access.
Davide Valsecchi: Denied access.

Overall: Didn't get to the checkpoint in time.

Multiple figures could be argued
Romain Grosjean: Failed, but earned another chance. Had mixed results against Räikkönen, then got Maldonado out of F1. Currently in Cavallino Rampante.
Alexander Rossi: Did quite well in 2015 and deserved to stay, but wasn't Indonesian enough. Now that that and the Indy 500's worn off, no one's really demanding his return that hard.
Jules Bianchi: Was likely going to be in a proto-Haas seat. What if?


Champions since 2005
Fernando Alonso: 1st in Euro Open in one year, 4th in IF3000 in one year.
Kimi Räikkönen: Zero years.
Lewis Hamilton: One year.
Jenson Button: Zero years.
Sebastian Vettel: Most of a year, but in two segments.
Nico Rosberg: One year.

Overall: Ranges from zero to one.
So how far do we have to go back to find someone who spent multiple full years in the same feeder series? Well, there is no good answer, because feeder series were a bit different back when the champions of the 1990s were coming through.


SUPER overall
Neither of them guarantee or preclude amazing results, but rookie champions do tend to be a bit better than second-year champions. Beyond that, things don't look great, but it's only three drivers. I'd say "he took x years" can be a major point, but can't end an argument all by itself.
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
User avatar
Ciaran
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 18:14

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Ciaran »

"Cavallino Rampante" would make a great name for a racing team. Sure, it just means "prancing horse" in Italian, but if Toro Rosso can get away with it so can Ferrari. :pantano:
Manager of Calsonic Team Impul in Formula E, K-Apex in PES & Eurasian F3 and Mitsuoka in Alt-F1 '76.
My career mode thread - 1988: AGS (19pts, 9th) // 1989: Arrows (25pts, 8th, 1 win!)
You'll never DNF if you always DNPQ. #RollSafe
User avatar
Aislabie
Posts: 1941
Joined: 14 Feb 2016, 11:06

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Aislabie »

Regenmeister94 wrote:"Cavallino Rampante"

Stealing this for Tommykl's Alt-F1
User avatar
novitopoli
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 987
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 16:56

Re: Ponderbox

Post by novitopoli »

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Pastor Maldonado: Never that great.


People have been banned for much less.
sw3ishida wrote:Jolyon Palmer brought us closer as a couple, for which I am grateful.


Ataxia wrote:
Londoner wrote:Something I've thought about - what happens to our canon should we have a worldwide recession or some other outside event?

We'll be fine. It's Canon, non Kodak.
User avatar
Bobby Doorknobs
Posts: 4059
Joined: 30 Jul 2014, 17:52
Location: In a safe place.

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Bobby Doorknobs »

Aislabie wrote:
Regenmeister94 wrote:"Cavallino Rampante"

Stealing this for Tommykl's Alt-F1

Stealing this for Italian F4.
#FreeGonzo
User avatar
Ciaran
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 18:14

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Ciaran »

We haven't talked about royalties yet, guys. I want nothing less than a year's supply of Peroni beer. :pantano:
Manager of Calsonic Team Impul in Formula E, K-Apex in PES & Eurasian F3 and Mitsuoka in Alt-F1 '76.
My career mode thread - 1988: AGS (19pts, 9th) // 1989: Arrows (25pts, 8th, 1 win!)
You'll never DNF if you always DNPQ. #RollSafe
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Ponderbox

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

Regenmeister94 wrote:We haven't talked about royalties yet, guys. I want nothing less than a year's supply of Peroni beer. :pantano:

I demand that if you use it, the title sponsor if any must be a food company or supermarket.
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Ponderbox

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

I was thinking, what is the average promotion/relegation rate of F1. Because it doesn't really work that way in the first place, here's how I redefined things:
*I defined being in F1 as appearing in at least half of the rounds.
*I made the number of seats in an off-season the average of how many there were in the two seasons it was between, again defining a car existing as being run in at least half of the rounds.
*To find the relegation rate, I just looked at the number of drivers who were in one season and out the next, trying to exclude cases where drivers deliberately retired, or where they died or had career-ending injuries. When a driver intentionally moved to a test seat or another series, being in a situation where they might've got a race drive if they stuck in it but probably not, I counted that as a relegation. Obviously there were judgment calls made and probably a thing or two I just plain missed, but I think it's better than counting everything.

So what are the numbers?
The average of all the relegation rates from 1981–82 to 2016–17 was exactly 5/28. Some eras were slightly more brutal than others, but not much, as you'll see.

Image
Here's the line chart. Too spiky to say much. There's the elevated part in the 1990s and first half of the 2000s, but that might be explained just by the declining number of cars. I could probably figure it out, but I won't bother.

Image
There's no nice bell curve, but there is a plateau at 15–35% comprising 72% of cases. The reason there are non-integer values is because of the 20-car off-seasons having (obviously) multiples of 5%, and I just gave half to each bracket. Probably not the most professional thing to do, I know....

The lowest (coming into 1989) and highest (coming into 1993) numbers are seasons where the number of cars changed by quite a bit. As I said, that entire period from 1989–90 to 1995–96 is probably just from the available drives shrinking. The sustained low period, '84–'85 to '87–'88, can't similarly be explained by massive growth, though.

I don't have any massive main point. I mostly did this as something to work with for a series with driver promotion/relegation as a gimmick or something.
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
User avatar
Rob Dylan
Posts: 3477
Joined: 18 May 2014, 15:34
Location: Andy Warhol's basement

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Rob Dylan »

Just to start a discussion, my first question after this race is not just if Bottas is a legitimate championship contender yet, but have we already passed peak Vettel this year?

Ferrari have a history over recent seasons of having poor development over the course of a year, even if they start off strongly. Mercedes seem to have been slowly getting themselves sorted out race by race, and even with a somewhat shaky Hamilton over the last few races, Austria showed that Bottas is just as capable of picking up podiums or even wins in Lewis's place when the latter has "bad days". With Räikönnen really not in contention this year, are we going to eventually see Vettel get squeezed out by an ever-improving Mercedes?

A factor that's just too hard to guess at this point as to whether they will improve as the season continues, is Red Bull. If they improve significantly, they could be a real hassle to the Ferrari drivers when it comes to fighting for podiums.
Murray Walker at the 1997 Austrian Grand Prix wrote:The other [Stewart] driver, who nobody's been paying attention to, because he's disappointing, is Jan Magnussen.
Felipe Nasr - the least forgettable F1 driver!
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: Ponderbox

Post by mario »

Rob Dylan wrote:Just to start a discussion, my first question after this race is not just if Bottas is a legitimate championship contender yet, but have we already passed peak Vettel this year?

Ferrari have a history over recent seasons of having poor development over the course of a year, even if they start off strongly. Mercedes seem to have been slowly getting themselves sorted out race by race, and even with a somewhat shaky Hamilton over the last few races, Austria showed that Bottas is just as capable of picking up podiums or even wins in Lewis's place when the latter has "bad days". With Räikönnen really not in contention this year, are we going to eventually see Vettel get squeezed out by an ever-improving Mercedes?

A factor that's just too hard to guess at this point as to whether they will improve as the season continues, is Red Bull. If they improve significantly, they could be a real hassle to the Ferrari drivers when it comes to fighting for podiums.

Whilst there has been talk of poor development pace by Ferrari, so far they still seem to be keeping fairly close to Mercedes and there is supposed to be a fairly sizeable engine upgrade package for Silverstone.

I do agree that Mercedes have been making improvements in recent races with their set ups, and that does seem to have given both of their drivers confidence. Bottas is gradually growing in confidence within the team, and is not that far off in the WDC either - it does present a slight dilemma for Mercedes though, since Ferrari can focus their resources onto Vettel in a way that Mercedes cannot really do so at this stage.

Red Bull is also interesting, because they have made a few improvements in some of the more recent races and, though not troubling the top two too much, might get in the mix later on if Renault can continue making improvements to their power units.

What I think might be more of an issue for Vettel would be the fact that he's now starting to be a bit marginal on engine parts. He's now onto his fourth turbocharger unit, and as some of his other components are starting to be marginal on lifespans, I can see that starting to limit him as I think that he'll only be able to set aside one new upgraded engine from Silverstone until the end of the year.

Penalties for component changes might well prove to be more damaging to Vettel's chances of success later in the year, which is where Red Bull's competitiveness is a real wildcard - still, I'd say that Vettel does seem to have had the better run of luck in recent races than Hamilton, and I think that Hamilton will find it tricky to close the gap.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
UncreativeUsername37
Posts: 3420
Joined: 25 May 2012, 14:36
Location: Earth

Re: Ponderbox

Post by UncreativeUsername37 »

- With the tyres approximately one compound harder than last year, this would've been a great time to symmetricalise the compound names.
- Now that we have the four-hour limit, what do we need the two-hour limit for? (Incidentally, the two-hour limit wasn't applied in Baku)
Rob Dylan wrote:Mercedes paying homage to the other W12 chassis by breaking down 30 minutes in
User avatar
TomWazzleshaw
Posts: 14370
Joined: 01 Apr 2009, 04:42
Location: Curva do lel
Contact:

Re: Ponderbox

Post by TomWazzleshaw »

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:- Now that we have the four-hour limit, what do we need the two-hour limit for? (Incidentally, the two-hour limit wasn't applied in Baku)


The four hour and two hour limits serve two slightly different purposes. In practice, what it basically means is that each promoter has a four hour window to get a maximum of two hours of racing in once the scheduled race start time is reached.

In the case of Baku, the two hour race clock was suspended under the red flag, but the four hour event clock keeps running. However, the final results will go off the four hour event clock (Don't ask me how that bit works, because I haven't thought that far ahead yet :lol: )
Biscione wrote:"Some Turkemenistani gulag repurposed for residential use" is the best way yet I've heard to describe North / East Glasgow.
User avatar
Bleu
Posts: 3388
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:38

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Bleu »

The four-hour rule came into effect in 2012 and the from the time I have followed F1 the only race it would have affected was Canadian GP 2011, which would have ended after lap 67 out of 70.
User avatar
Klon
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 7184
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 17:07
Location: Schleswig-Holstein, FRG
Contact:

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Klon »

Bleu wrote:The four-hour rule came into effect in 2012 and the from the time I have followed F1 the only race it would have affected was Canadian GP 2011, which would have ended after lap 67 out of 70.


Obviously, as the rule was made as a direct response to that Grand Prix. Such a scenario had not occured before, which is why there was no rule.
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: Ponderbox

Post by AndreaModa »

The tyres should just be A compound, B compound, C compound, etc.

Try telling someone new to F1 that the soft tyre is the hardest compound in the race... :facepalm:
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
WeirdKerr
Posts: 1864
Joined: 05 Apr 2009, 15:57
Location: on the edge of nowhere with a ludicrous grid penalty.....

Re: Ponderbox

Post by WeirdKerr »

AndreaModa wrote:The tyres should just be A compound, B compound, C compound, etc.

Try telling someone new to F1 that the soft tyre is the hardest compound in the race... :facepalm:


I can just about remember 1986, drivers could and often would use mixed compounds on the cars
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6860
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Ataxia »

AndreaModa wrote:The tyres should just be A compound, B compound, C compound, etc.

Try telling someone new to F1 that the soft tyre is the hardest compound in the race... :facepalm:


This is why Indycar works, it's easy to tell the audience that the FIRESTONE® red compound is softer than the FIRESTONE® black. Now, where's that SUNOCO® fuel...
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
Bleu
Posts: 3388
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:38

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Bleu »

We are now fourth season in the hybrid era. Still we see a lot of complaining about the car sounds. The current cars are very fast.

That led to my thinking:

When the change was done, there were a lot of other changes to the cars and therefore lap times were slower than in the last season of V8s.

From the first season of hybrids though, the straightline speeds have been faster. I feel that fact was much not highlighted in the change, making many people thinking that engines were the reason cars are slower.

That made the general reaction of the fans worse.
User avatar
Waris
Posts: 1781
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 01:07
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands

Re: Ponderbox

Post by Waris »

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:- With the tyres approximately one compound harder than last year, this would've been a great time to symmetricalise the compound names.


I'm thinking Pirelli probably don't want to have a compound called the SUPER HARD compound, because of reasons.
MOTOR RACING IS DANGEROUS
User avatar
AustralianStig
Posts: 1206
Joined: 21 Apr 2013, 00:26
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: Ponderbox

Post by AustralianStig »

Waris wrote:I'm thinking Pirelli probably don't want to have a compound called the SUPER HARD compound, because of reasons.

I still think the ultra-soft should be called Flaccid.
Join the GP Rejects league at Fantasy F1: https://fantasy.formula1.com/join/?=2a1f25

CoopsII wrote:
Biscione wrote:To the surprise of no-one, Daniil Kvyat wins ROTR for Sochi, by a record margin that may not be surpassed for some time.

I always knew Marko read this forum.
User avatar
tommykl
Posts: 7062
Joined: 07 Apr 2010, 17:10
Location: Banbury, Oxfordshire, UK

Re: Ponderbox

Post by tommykl »

Bleu wrote:We are now fourth season in the hybrid era. Still we see a lot of complaining about the car sounds. The current cars are very fast.

That led to my thinking:

When the change was done, there were a lot of other changes to the cars and therefore lap times were slower than in the last season of V8s.

From the first season of hybrids though, the straightline speeds have been faster. I feel that fact was much not highlighted in the change, making many people thinking that engines were the reason cars are slower.

That made the general reaction of the fans worse.

It's quite simple, really: people hate change. And many fans have grown up equating "Formula 1 = tinnitus-inducingly loud engines". Never mind the fact that many of the same fans point to the 1000bhp monstrosities of the mid-80s as examples of "real engines" without quite realising that they were also turbocharged engines with six cylinders or fewer.
kevinbotz wrote:Cantonese is a completely nonsensical f*cking alien language masquerading as some grossly bastardised form of Chinese

Gonzo wrote:Wasn't there some sort of communisim in the East part of Germany?
Post Reply