Don't get me wrong, McLaren are 'my' team. But I do get tired of Dennis whining (for want of a better word). It's a case of 'the little biy who cried wolf', it makes his true claims (like this one) seem less relevant. And isn't Michael's contract with Ferrari until 2004?
He might be giving himself 2 years, just in case . I'm a Williams man myself, mainly because I got interested when Mansell/Hill/Coulthard (who I saw win the Macau GP) were driving for them. The Hill/Schumacher rivalry was good to watch as well. I'm also quite an ABF, but that's mainly because they are so good at the moment.
If you get Speedvision on your local cable (I think its now called Speed TV?) you can watch all the races live on Sunday (the time varies of course) plus Friday practice, and Saturday qualifying. They used to (and probably still) show the replay on Monday prime time. They show all the season´s races with the exception of the ones that ABC chooses to show so you won´t miss any minute of the F1 season. Actually, the Speedvision announcers are MUCH better than the NASCAR retards I heard on ABC for last year´s US Grand Prix at Indy.
Well, the 2002 F1 season was really exciting, wasn't it? *yawn* Was there ever a pass for the lead in a race that did not involve a pit stop, someone's car breaking or team orders?
Re: Question Only ones on ABC still to be shown are Monza and Indy. The rest will all be on SpeedTV live. (Monza will be on tape delay...no live broadcast)
No, I was out of town. I usually only watch the first lap of an F1 race anyways because 99% of all F1 races these days are over after then except for the scenarios I listed above. If yesterday's race was the great exception, hey, cool. I guess even a blind squirrel finds an acorn sometimes and even F1 can produce an interesting race if only because of the law of averages.
Sure there were, but you are quite right though of course exaggerated. I don't see an apropriate solution as the pit stops are what fans want to see, but maybe they should go back to the old rule and disallow them. Then the drivers would be forced to overtake if they want to improve their position and the danger of technical problems would increase (also boring races in which almost everybody is reaching the final flag). Anyway, Jenson Button is rumoured to take Olivier Panis' job at BAR for the next season. Heinz-Harald Frentzen is expected to replace Alan McNish at Toyota even within this season. Arrows would be very welcome to save his high salary and even get a transfer fee.
Well, I have to say your constant posts about how boring F1 is are far more tiresome than the racing itself. If you're not interested, how about just staying away from the F1-related threads.
Truth hurts, doesn't it? If you can't handle the truth, that's what the "Ignore" function is for. The problem is that technology has become so much more important than the driver. If you're in the right team, you're gonna win races. If not.... hey, Michael Schumacher in an Arrows is an also-ran. Now I'm not trying to say that there ever was some mystical Golden Age in F1 when guys were passing each other every other lap and all but there was a time when a Gilles Villeneuve could hop into a complete crapbox like his Ferraris and be very competitive. There was a time when car/driver combos of relatively equal capacity could pass each other. But with both the cars and the Mickey Mouse, chicane-ridden tracks the way they are great racing like the the famous Villeneuve-Arnoux duel could never happen and the fans are getting ripped off. I guess if I was Bernie the first thing I'd do is outlaw carbon fiber breaks because they alone make it virtually impossible to pass unless the guy in front of you has a problem with his car or makes a mistake. I'd also get rid of as many chicanes as possible to restore the tracks to their former glory as much as possible. The "soft" barriers used on American oval tracks have proven effective and would be placed at the more dangerous corners in F1. Senna's death, for example, might have been avoided if Imola had had these barriers. Finally, I'd spread the FIA cash to the teams more evenly to avoid the vast gaps in performance that really don't do the sport any good. For too long only one or two teams have had any realistic hope of winning unless the usual suspects all get wiped out at the first turn. What benefit do the spectators get from seeing the Minardis of the world slog about in utter futility? F1 should be helping the minnows achieve at least a minimum level of credibility if only to avoid making half the F1 field look so amateur.
Not exactly. If somehow Arrows (or whatever they'll be next season) had Schumacher, I think they'd be a much better team. Were Ferrari head and shoulders better than the field when he arrived? It's not so much the technology but the development of the technology. Off season development and actual use of data collected on race day are what you are saying is the problem. Right now, Ferrari do that better than anyone. Will it always be that way? Nah, MS will retire one day. But remember, it's still the driver that works with the engineers to build the car...and the driver is the one that has to get it around the track. (Kimi in the hairpin with 5 laps to go) As much as I hate to say it, MS is head and shoulders above the field right now. Yes, money does help to a great extent...but I know that MS in an Arrows is going to beat the crap out of me in a Ferrari (that is, if Arrows actually tries to qualify) You may not find that interesting, but there are plenty of people who do.
They'd go from being at the tail end of the also-rans to the forefront of the also-rans. an improvement, yes, only a very small one. They were on the cusp when he arrived which is why he went there. He's no dummy, that Michael. He could tell which way the wind was blowing and that's why he went to Ferrari instead of Williams or McLaren. You think those teams wouldn't want to have signed him? No, it's the actual technology itself. The carbon fiber brakes, for example, that make braking an all-or-nothing proposition and cut braking distances down to where it is impossible to pass a car that is anywhere close to yours in horsepower. MS isn't the problem any more than Senna or Prost were before him. When he retires whoever steps into the Ferrari after him will become an instant race winner and probably champion - if they can beat Rubens. So explain the careers of Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve by using your theory... It was Williams that made them champions and emphatically not the other way around. Put J. Villeneuve in the Ferrari and Schumi in the BAR and guess where they'll both finish their races. Yes, but he won't beat Villeneuve, Irvine, Panis, Trulli or even his little bro if the other guy has a Ferrari and MS is stuck in an Arrows or a Sauber. It just won't happen. I bet he woulodn't win in a McLaren or Williams even. His best bet for a good result would be to qualify well for Monaco and hope everyone else breaks or else pray for rain every weekend. Well, plenty of people find "Survivor", "Jerry Springer" and reruns of "Three's Company" interesting but I still think they suck so there ya go. Not that F1 "sucks" as such but while I appreciate fine driving and technologically impressive cars as much as the next guy but I think CART puts on a much better show and has better racing than F1.
McLaren was the nonplusultra when Schumacher signed at Ferrari. The first two years for him were hard work as lots of painful problems occured. I don't like Schumacher either, but credit to the one who deserves it: together with his friends Jean Todt and Ross Brawn he made Ferrari the team it is today. And yes, McLaren didn't want to sign him. They had the best car and Mercedes was afraid that everyone says they are winning the races because of Schumacher and not the Mercedes engine. Sure, they'll have a technology advantage. But I doubt that they can keep it over many years. It's an era at the moment and actually I don't see anyone who can stop them. But in the late 90s nobody could expect that someone could stop McLaren either. Villeneuve 1 or 2, Schumacher maybe rank 6. MS is an extraordinary driver who'd still be the one to beat if all drove in the same car. But that's the problem of all racing history that quality of the cars is the most important factor. Ralf Schumacher recently stated in an interview that all driver are within 0.3 seconds regarding their abilities (okay, except Yoong, but he didn't want to state that ) SueB and PZ: I think it is legitimate criticism to say that F1 isn't that interesting anymore. With MS racing from top position to top position even the TV ratings in Germany dropped dramatically. Everybody is everything but pleased that a championship is decided after such a short time. Usually the TV stations made major stories for days about the champion - this time even on Monday nobody mentioned it anymore. And though I am repeating myself: the core problem for me is the security thinking. Some expert (forgot who it was) mentioned it this weekend as well. We want to see critical points where one mistake at least causes a major loss of time if not the end of the race. It's boring if almost everybody reaches the final flag and mistakes aren't punished. Look at the race that Barrichello won before Schumacher - Schumacher made a mistake, his car turned around, but as left and right besides the track everything was normal street layer instead of grass or gravel, he just lost about five seconds. With a different layer he would lose much more time and additionally have the danger of some car parts being damaged, but that way it is like a computer simulator. I am just waiting for the cars being surrounded by a rubber layer to make collisions more harmless, the track being limited by cotton wool boards, the cars getting a flower holder somewhere and maybe we can also introduce 30 kph speed zones in critical passages of the track.
Different topic: Button indeed signed at BAR for the next season and replaces Panis. Not many open spots for 2003, but many drivers who want them. In discussion: Jaguar - de la Rosa stays, but who'll be the other one? Rumors: Frentzen, Webber or Irvine again if he confesses the strong performance of the last weekend and accepts to earn less money. Toyota - they still deny, but it seems secure that McNish has to leave. Candidates: Frentzen, Wurz, Panis Sauber - is rumored to be unsatisfied with Massa, especially after the last weekend. Jordan - probably doesn't get Honda engines anymore, which means that Takuma Sato will have to go. Frentzen is also a topic here. Arrows/Minardi - as always open driver spots, but they've got to finance a new team first. ------- I think that Frentzen has best chances to return to a better team as he's delivering sponsor money. Also F1 is affected by the TV money cut and every cent is important (additionally cigarette advertising will be forbidden soon). Might be that he'll be back at Jordan if they can settle in the lawsuit about 7.5 M remaining salary from the last season. One of Jordan's main sponsors is Deutsche Post and they'd love to see a German driver. But also Toyota is a good option. They produce their F1 cars in Cologne - about half an hour away from Frentzen's home town. Good location advantage. And at Jaguar Niki Lauda, who's still expert on German television, knows about the benefits of German drivers as well.
I don't mind that people think that it's boring. Sometimes, it is. There are also boring soccer games But I just got sick and tired of hearing mr. pak - oh, really, I don't feel like going back to check the spelling, say it for the two hundredth time (going back to B.C - Before the Crash). I know that goes with the territory of BigSoccer and forums in general, but I just couldn't help myself. And, thanks for the suggestion, joseph p. I've never tried the ignore button, I think I'll try it now.
The point when making a team change is not to go with who won yesterday but who will win tomorrow. Granted, this is occasionally the same team but in MS's case, Ferrari had Todt and Brawn developing their car and McLaren was reaching a dead end with their then-current chassis-engine combo. MS made the smart choice. If he'd gone to McLaren he may have won one championship but then languished along with Coulthard and Hakkinen instead of winning two and probably more championships with Ferrari. MS's career has been built not only on his undeniable talent but on his uncanny ability to be in the right car at the right time. Having one team dominate for a while is nothing new in F1 although it mostly happened in the 1950s and 60s. But sooner or later a team reaches a dead end in developing their championship winning car and usually someone else takes over. But while we can name drivers who have won titles by having the right car (Villeneuve, Damon Hill, Hakkinen), you can't name a team that won a title it didn't deserve just because they happened to get the right driver. More like Villeneuve 1 or 2 and MS anywhere from 8th to 12th depending on how crappy the BAR is and how many races MS can finish with it. Anyway, my point is made and you apparently accept it. Well, this is what I've been saying. In F1 the car is what matters and if a driver has the "hot" car, he has to be a real chimp not to win whereas MS in a Minardi is still fighting his teammate for second to last place (unless it rains). Because of this the same cars and drivers win again and again and again and we all know who will probably win before the race even starts. Unless MS's car breaks or he gets taken out in someone else's accident he should win. Maybe in six or seven years it will be Williams or McLaren that regains the hot car and then their #1 driver will win most of the races while their #2 wins most of the rest. While that may make F1 purists happy it does make for a boring season for most fans. Other sports put lots of effort into trying to maintain at least some kind of parity among teams so that multi-year dynasties are kept to a minimum. I think CART has a more entertaining formula than F1 right now. Sure, CART cars aren't at the absolute cutting edge of available technology but then neither are F1 cars anymore now that the FIA is busy banning all the potential electronic goodies that teams have developed. So this shows that the F1 bosses have at least recognized that there is some sort of need to place limits on the abilities of the top three teams to spend themselves into a state of permanent rotating championship contenders while all the other teams are mere window dressing. I personally think that the real place for the "cutting edge of technology" is now in sports car endurance racing which, unlike F1 or other single-seater formulas has never even theoretically been about who is the best driver but all about which is the best car. Sportscar enduros are also not as dependent on live TV as single-seater sprint races. I mean, even the 24 Hours of LeMans is not broadcast live in its entirety anywhere to my knowledge. So the onus of "putting on a good show" just isn't there the way it is with F1 or CART. Sports cars should take over the "latest technology and damn the cost" mantle from F1 since F1 has been limiting technology now for some years anyway. If technology buffs want to see the latest goodies and electronics, they should be able to follow the sportscars that have ABS, traction control, active suspension, the ability of the teams to determine the handling characteristics of the car from the pit lane, and other things that are currently banned in F1.
Oh and reading the same old convo on who should be the US Nats starting 11 or why the Revs suck this year blah blah blah is riveting? Sorry, but you may find the fact of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west boring but it doesn't make it any less true. If F1 ever fixes itself and provides us with exciting racing, then I'll be first in line to point this out. It's just too bad that the current show is deadly dull. That's the truth and if you're too weak to handle it then by all means, please put me on your Ignore list like some four year old plugging her ears and yelling "La la la la I can't hear you la la la la..." At least I provide some positive comments on what the specific causes of the boredom are and recommendations on how F1 can fix itself and I don't just sit around and whine about things like, oh say, people whose opinion is different from mine.
Admittedly it wasn't as exciting as others I have known. And at least the races aren't stage managed to produce these challenges for the lead, by the introduction of a safety car at untimely intervals. Again, its a case of the sport being moulded to suit the watchers, rather than trying to find which team is actually best at what it does.
To say the least... True. Micromanaging individual races is sad, especially since in NASCAR they don't have to worry about the same two guys winning every race like in F1. Fine, but if everyone knows in advance who will win, don't whine when people figure "why bother watching if I already know who is going to win" and they start tuning out as will happen for the rest of the F1 season now that the race for champion is over. If I want to watch awesome driving and I don't care about knowing the outcome of the race in advance I can watch old tapes of Fangio and Giles Villeneuve.
Well, now I know how the ignore button works, but it doesn't work. I saw that you posted something good and worthwhile so I checked again on the second post and got a lecture. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't mind constructive criticism of the style of racing. That last post (next-to-last I should say) was good. But chiming in every time the thread gets updated to say "ho, hum, this is SO boring, why does anybody even care" is another thing entirely. I hardly have enough time to keep up with the things I AM interested in, much less go trolling around in threads and forums that hold no interest to me. I don't post in the Spain Forums, for instance. And I typically don't enter the Baseball or Golf threads. But it's a "free country" as they always say and, if YOU have the time, you can do whatever you want. I just find it, as I said, tiresome, and said as much. pssst. What I REALLY suspect is, that you have some sort of love/hate relationship with F1 and are secretly interested in it.
Nope. It's more like - "This is boring and they'd better fix it before people really stop caring because if someone like me who was involved in SCCA racing for years and has *WORKED* F&C at several Grands Prix, CART, IMSA (remember IMSA?), the 24 Hours of LeMans, etc. thinks it's boring then just imagine what the casual fan thinks."
Aha! So, I was right. By all means, criticize away. But I just wish you would refrain from those pithy comments which suggest that those of us who are more interested than the all-important "casual fan" are stupid for caring.
It's the thousands of casual fans who pay the bills in virtually all sports whether the diehards like it or not. Anyway, my contempt is not for the fans who keep tuning in hoping this season won't be another yawnfest but the idiots running F1 who either can't figure out how to fix it or are too arrogant to fix it so that it is no longer nothing but a high-speed parade every week. Sure, F1 (like soccer) has been able to ride the wave of ever-increasing TV money for the past 15 years but what good is it if they run the business into the ground by borign the hell out of people? The morons running F1 are just lucky that the people running CART are just as stupid as they are because all my racing friends universally admit that while F1 has more technology and maybe better driving CART has much the better racing.
If the same 2 guys are winnig every race then it just proves that they and their respective teams are the best at what they do. What's the point in managing things so we can falsely give a win to the arrows team for a lucky last lap, when everyone knows they aren't the best? Its the way it is because the sport was around before millions of people watched it. Change the rules of the sport (allowing stage managed re-grouping), and you change the point of the sport. The point is to find the best, not to penalise those that are the best. And why would we start whining if people go off F1 becasue the races aren't exciting enough? IMO those are the sort of people that would fit very nicely into the bracket that enjoy US rules of car racing and so are no great loss to the ranks of F1 supporters. And besides, watching the F1 races this season, I haven't noticed a significant drop in attendance frigures at the meetings and I suspect the TV figures aren't in decline either.
Fortunately for the FIA (and other interested parties like myself), the 10 or 15 casual F1 fans in the US aren't really who counts. The millions of fanatical - and casual - fans in Italy, Germany, Brazil, the UK, etc are the ones who really matter. And, as the previous poster said, I haven't heard of any reduced interest in the series in those countries because of the current dominance by Schumacher and Ferrari. Especially Italy and Germany, of course.