newyorkvol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
- Messages
- 3,851
- Likes
- 5,606
Thats why I called it a Nascar finish. 100% feels rigged AFAm I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
I've been watching since Novemberish of last year maybe? Whenever Grosjean had his crash. Was channel surfing, stopped to see what was going on and have been interested ever since.
It's a good season, but there are things I still wonder about.
So far as I can tell being a new F1 fan it seems like the cars aren't even close to even. I don't see the point in celebrating a driver so much when 90% of the grid has no chance to win and won't even fight for position because they'll be happy finishing 5th or 6th.
Honestly I'd rather see more parity on the cars so you can actually see driver achievement, but I have a feeling I'd be shouted down by longtime F1 fans. Yea, Lewis has won a ton of championships but if he were in a Williams or Hass the last few years and someone else was in the Mercedes how would it have fallen out then? It's a distinct advantage when your car is the fastest in the straights fastest in the corners.
I like that the teams can modify their cars to each track and there is strategy involved, but at the same time it's kind of a letdown when you know before the race even starts that Mercedes or Red Bull will likely have two of the 3 podium spots if not all 3.
It was historical, but a historical farce. This has been a legacy of the dogshit stewarding we've had all year. But Max was ultimately deserving of the title, as would Lewis have been if he had won.Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
A lot depends on perspective. I was thinking the race was rigged for Hamilton when he did not receive a penalty on the first lap. I really think that if it had been any other driver, he would have had time added. Maybe I’m wrong but that’s how I saw it, which made the result all the more amazing.It was historical, but a historical farce. This has been a legacy of the dogshit stewarding we've had all year. But Max was ultimately deserving of the title, as would Lewis have been if he had won.
I've been watching since Novemberish of last year maybe? Whenever Grosjean had his crash. Was channel surfing, stopped to see what was going on and have been interested ever since.
It's a good season, but there are things I still wonder about.
So far as I can tell being a new F1 fan it seems like the cars aren't even close to even. I don't see the point in celebrating a driver so much when 90% of the grid has no chance to win and won't even fight for position because they'll be happy finishing 5th or 6th.
Honestly I'd rather see more parity on the cars so you can actually see driver achievement, but I have a feeling I'd be shouted down by longtime F1 fans. Yea, Lewis has won a ton of championships but if he were in a Williams or Hass the last few years and someone else was in the Mercedes how would it have fallen out then? It's a distinct advantage when your car is the fastest in the straights fastest in the corners.
I like that the teams can modify their cars to each track and there is strategy involved, but at the same time it's kind of a letdown when you know before the race even starts that Mercedes or Red Bull will likely have two of the 3 podium spots if not all 3.
Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
Hamilton said finish manipulated
I just find this amusing, even if it’s true. He’s been the beneficiary of the F1 equivalent of the Brady Rule for the better part of a decade. I’ve had a hard time finding interest in this sport because of the dominance of the Mercedes run and lack of an American driver. At least this spices things up a bit.
I'm not a hardcore fan by any means. My wife was a big Michael Schumacher fan and I went to the USGP at Indy with her a couple of times. I don't recall her supporting Vettel but she latched on to Hamilton at some point. Most of my exposure to F1 has come during the runs of those two drivers, which has made it sort of boring for me. I wasn't following the sport in the 70s and early 80s, but when you look back at the history it seems like the field was much more competitive and the top drivers switched teams with more regularity. Of course, we Americans had Mario Andretti in the field.Being new to the sport, one thing that jumps out is there seems to be tons of inconsistency with rule enforcement and ALL the drivers/teams are ALWAYS complaining about something.
Yea I get that and I have no criticism of any fans. It just seems to me all the prestige and excitement should be for the constructor's championship, not so much the driver championship. But I doubt that's as interesting for F1 and fans. The gap between Mercedes/Red Bull cars and everyone else was pretty big. And that's a credit to the entire team.Americans are obsessed with 1st place and international sports fans have a different perspective. It's more about how you do with what you got than it is 1st place (I mean this all relatively speaking). It's different. Only 8 countries have ever won the world cup, and most countries are unlikely to qualify in any given decade, but that won't stop Guatemalans from being rabid fans of the process and proud of doing well in qualifiers (while not qualifying).
I noticed the same. Steward decisions seem to be all over the place.Being new to the sport, one thing that jumps out is there seems to be tons of inconsistency with rule enforcement and ALL the drivers/teams are ALWAYS complaining about something.
This is revisionist at best, on account of both F1 and the top division of English football. I wasn't alive in the 70s or 80s but seeing season reviews and speaking to people who were, if you weren't in a McLaren, you likely weren't going to win the title, especially in the 80s. And back in those days even if you had a thrilling title fight, you'd have people regularly winning by 30-45 seconds at best, then a further 30-45 seconds to third, and often 4th would be a lap down. The field spread was comical, and often you had like 8 cars finishing. As far as English football, Leeds, Derby, and Notts were all well supported(and still are) clubs, and I'd say even super club in the case of Forest. They didn't adapt to the formation of the Prem, and they didn't organize to stop it, either.I'm not a hardcore fan by any means. My wife was a big Michael Schumacher fan and I went to the USGP at Indy with her a couple of times. I don't recall her supporting Vettel but she latched on to Hamilton at some point. Most of my exposure to F1 has come during the runs of those two drivers, which has made it sort of boring for me. I wasn't following the sport in the 70s and early 80s, but when you look back at the history it seems like the field was much more competitive and the top drivers switched teams with more regularity. Of course, we Americans had Mario Andretti in the field.
I liken current F1 to current EPL. I enjoy watching the premier league, but I kinda wish I had been paying more attention back in the day when the participation rules and financials made it possible for clubs like Notts Forest, Leeds and Derby County could actually with the league.
It really isn't, the difference isn't in ultimate pace of the car, but how easy they are on tires and the ultimate pace of Hamilton and Verstappen, combined with how good their teams are in strategy and pitstops. Pierre Gasly is consistently close to the top on the timing sheets, but he doesn't have the team to fight with them on Sundays, even though he's beaten Bottas and Perez on occasion and was in Red Bull a few years ago where he didn't perform to this levelThe gap between Mercedes/Red Bull cars and everyone else was pretty big. And that's a credit to the entire team.
I think champions won in a mcclaren maybe once in the 70s and early 80s. Anyone can look at champions year by year and see that different people were winning in different cars with different engines. Maybe you should just use google instead of the old timers you consulted.This is revisionist at best, on account of both F1 and the top division of English football. I wasn't alive in the 70s or 80s but seeing season reviews and speaking to people who were, if you weren't in a McLaren, you likely weren't going to win the title, especially in the 80s. And back in those days even if you had a thrilling title fight, you'd have people regularly winning by 30-45 seconds at best, then a further 30-45 seconds to third, and often 4th would be a lap down. The field spread was comical, and often you had like 8 cars finishing. As far as English football, Leeds, Derby, and Notts were all well supported(and still are) clubs, and I'd say even super club in the case of Forest. They didn't adapt to the formation of the Prem, and they didn't organize to stop it, either.
Sorry, missed where you said early 80's. But that was a unique period in time where aero was not understood, and you could just drop in a Cosworth V8 like everyone else did and take your chances. Great in theory, but that period is oft romanticized, but in truth, a dark period of the sport filled with death and ineptitude by the sport's leadership. In truth, parity back then was less about the formula being right, but variables that either can't exist, or or ones that no one in their right mind should want to existI think champions won in a mcclaren maybe once in the 70s and early 80s. Anyone can look at champions year by year and see that different people were winning in different cars with different engines. Maybe you should just use google instead of the old timers you consulted.