16/05/2012
NEWS STORY
 |
The Marlborough is usually the perfect litmus test in terms of how casual fans regard Formula One, so imagine my surprise when Arthur, having said that Sunday's was "a funny old race" went on to admit that he hadn't watched it live - instead heading off to Twickenham for the HSBC Sevens World Series - but had watched the highlights late on Monday evening. Two other regulars subsequently revealed that they hadn't watched the race live as did Adrian of the local pet shop.
Now, ignoring the World Sevens, Sunday saw further heavy rainfall in this part of the world, so washing the car or doing some work in the garden was totally out of the question. Furthermore, this being the start of the European season, this was the first race (and qualifying) of the year at a convenient time and it was all live on the BBC, for those that refuse to pay for Sky's offering.
With four winners from the first four races, and no sign of the one man/one team domination of 2011, surely F1 has more going for it than ever, so why the big turn off in terms of casual fans?
Then, late on Sunday night, I caught this article in The Herald by Neil Drysdale, an article, all things considered, I could have written myself. Interestingly, Drysdale uses a word that I also used a couple of times over the weekend and which has been used since, most noticeably by Red Bull owner Dietrich Mateschitz. The word in question being "lottery".
For me, personally, this season, the sport has gone just one step too far. Absolutely no disrespect to Pirelli, who have done the job asked of them by the powers that be, but in my humble opinion F1 2012 is too much like staged entertainment and not enough like sport. Drivers now are having to race at 90 - 95% during races, dare they run out of rubber, while Q3 has become a mockery... oh for those last minute charges of Ayrton, Mika and the like.
Someone, somewhere wrote at the weekend that the current scenario - five winners from five races is like something out of Hollywood, but surely that is the point, there is almost something artificial about what we are witnessing this season.
As with Pirelli, I mean no disrespect to Pastor Maldonado or Williams, the victory on Sunday being well deserved and rightly popular, but it was a freak result, and the signs are that there are more to come.
With the Champions League and The Olympics on the horizon, not to mention the damage done to viewing figures by the Sky deal, one wonder how F1 will fare over the summer, especially if the weather improves. How much longer before fans, casual and long-term get the feeling that what they are watching isn't sport but another (stage managed) reality show. Or is it simply a case of us never being satisfied?
After the first five rounds of the 2012 season, we'd like to hear what you think of it so far.
Please Note: This Talking Point is not about TV coverage, in the sense of Sky or BBC, we will devote a Talking Point to that in due course. This is about what you think of the five races thus far and how the season/rules are playing out.
Chris Balfe
Editor
To send your thoughts, click here
Note: Please include your full name - without a full valid name we will not publish your entry.
Martin Trudel - Canada
Well….. I have mixed feelings regarding the start of the 2012 season because for me, an F1 race should run with cars loaded with fuel on hard tires with no refueling or tire changes. And qualifications should run for 60 minutes on low fuel. This being said, it is more tempting to watch a race not knowing in advance that a particular driver or team has 95% of chances to win the race since their package is so much better than the competition. I still prefer to see drivers at 90-95% because they have to save the tires with all the unprevisibility that the tires rules bring this year than to see a procession of 24 cars with a total of 12 passes for the whole season. And why say that the drivers are at 90-95% ? And not that they should be at 100% under the conditions they are in? The problem (if it is a problem) right now is that not a single team presently understands fully how the tires work. This should change in the coming months.
Peter Mann - UK
The racing is great, the coverage on the Beeb good (with DC getting better with each race) and we should be thankful that the result is unpredictable. Isn't that what we've all been yearning for? (Perhaps not if you're a McLaren / Button / Hamilton devotee.) As for the casual watcher, what a curious crowd: fancy wanting predictability.
Alan Knight
Give them some decent rubber and let them race. The formula 1 inner circle are so divorced from the real world that they (along with many other business and government cliques) view the spectator/ public/ consumer as stupid. They also think that the level of policing (stewards) is appropriate for a multi million dollar 'sport' that purports to be run rationally. Apparently inconsistent, irrational and downright stupid applications of the dubious rule book relegate the performance to a farce.
Tennis bit the bullet and introduced hawk eye, the FA is currently studying two options to at least address goals and offside so perhaps our sport that is dripping with technology could raise it's game from pure vaudeville.
Jean Todt seems to run the presidency from a distance but sometimes action is required.
Tyler Smith - USA
I think this is the best racing that I have ever seen in almost 20 years of watching F1. Frankly, I would rather go into a race not knowing who will win because remember F1 fans, not that long ago we were slamming the sport for being too predictable (especially when were in the middle of the Michael/Ferrari dominance). Truthfully, I see this as the field being so close together and also the result of stable rules over the last few years which has given the teams the chance to maximize the potential of their cars. The one thing that I would want to see changed is for more tyres to be allowed for qualifying. I think the best way you could do that would be to allow for one more set of each compound for qualifying and then return that extra set to the FIA so that we don't have to see cars not running in Q3 just because they're wanting to save tyres for the race. But outside of that, may the best driver win.
Ralph Heesen - USA
This season to me is one of two faces, while the entertainment value is incredible I cannot help but find the sports value lacking. It is a show made by Pirelli and the driving skill required are closer to that of endurance racers then F1 racers. While I would never lessen the skills of endurance racers, I watch Formula One to watch the best of the best race to the best of their capability each race. If I wanted to watch a purely entertaining racing class, I would watch NASCAR like the rest of the people here in the SouthEast (USA).
Ian Connolly - Manchester
Well it's good to see things supposedly mixed up and not so predictable. But just slow down one minute, let's just review things. Spanish GP, Who started on pole? Maldenado, were did he finish, first. Who started second,? Alonso, were did he finish? Who started from third? Raikonnen? Where did he finish? Who started from fourth? Grosjean, were did he finish? Etc.
Isn't that how's it been for years, you may as well not bother with the race because they finish were they started from, is it really that unpredictable now? Or is it just an illusion?
Jordan Senter - USA
I'm all for close racing and unpredictable results, and we have seen quite a bit of that so far this season. I'll admit I've been entertained so far. What I don't like is how manufactured it all feels, and how F1 seems like a neutered shadow of its former self, even compared with a few years ago. I am a younger fan and have only been following since the early 2000s. My favorite season so far was the 2005 season. We still had the screaming V10 engines, and the tires were made to last the whole race distance which meant one could still attempt ballsy overtaking maneuvers well into the race as the marble buildup was comparatively minimal. Raikkonen passing Fisichella around the outside of turn 1 on the last lap at Suzuka was fantastic. It actually got me to jump to my feet in excitement (and he didn't even need DRS).
Later we downsized to V8s, but at least they could rev to 22,000 rpm and the cars looked wicked with all the complex aero bits. The recession ruined F1. Now we have frozen engines with rev limits and cars that look ridiculously stupid with stepped noses, wide, flat front wings matched with tall skinny rear ones. We also have spec tires, the complex KERS system, and the ludicrous DRS wing. I understand the reasoning behind these decisions, but they have not saved F1 in my eyes.
Formula 1 should be about the fastest and most advanced cars on the planet piloted by the fastest drivers, racing flat out every lap to try and cross the finish line before every other competitor. F1 should not be a semi-spec, tightly controlled series where drivers have to tiptoe around the track each lap, babying their tires so they don't fall off and lose 10 places in less than a minute.
For F1's future: Scrap DRS. Let the teams and engine manufacturers run as many revs and as much boost pressure as they think they can get away with, so instead of opening your funny little wing that the guy in front of you can't, you just turn up the revs and boost and hope you get past before your engine grenades. Fix the aero regulations so that the cars don't look so unpleasant (I don't care if this means more or less downforce). Bring back tires that the drivers can really lean on consistently and that don't fall apart all over the track. I could go on all night, but I'll leave it here for now.
Dave Farmer - UK
Lewis Hamilton should be leading the championship by miles but McLaren are making too many mistakes. Australia started on pole, was running 2nd behind Button passed by Vettel because of safety car, finished 3rd. Malaysia started on pole finished 3rd, in rain affected race. China qualified 2nd, had a 5 place grid penalty for gearbox finished 3rd. Bahrain started 2nd finished 8th through botched pit stops. Spain qualified pole started last finished 8th.
It seems Lewis is qualifying well, and driving well in the race but is losing places through no fault of his own.
Viktor K - Bulgaria
Apart from the clear fact that qualifying is a joke, I am not really convinced that the sport is going to lose a great amount of fans. Well, I agree that I haven't voluntarily missed a race for the last 12 years, which makes my opinion a bit worthless, but still I don't mind some lottery. At the end the team and the driver that were the most consistent in that "lottery environment " would win. In a way, however it is ridiculously ironic , how just 5 years ago we didn't want to watch the sport because we knew that Schumi will win and now suddenly when we have no idea who is going to win we still don't like the sport.
Furthermore I think we visualize spectators as being Europeans and mostly Brits for that matter , if they stop watching for some reason this reflects to the whole world …. Why don't we ask Venezuelans or Mexicans for that matter, if there is increase or decrease in interest towards F1! Bottom line I don't think the sport is going overboard , yes it could be better but what couldn't in this world, instead of discussing is it good or bad take it for what it is and give suggestions to change it. One thing could be setting sets of tires for qually only let's say 3 and completely new tires for the race let them push as much as they can in qually and afterwards the team that cannot deal with tire management would drop positions in the race and would still be penalized.
Gianluca Mattioli
Firstly - I've been impressed with what sky have done, but in the UK the coverage across both BBC and Sky are not as good as when it was under one roof. First thing they need to do is reunite DC and Brundle, sack the guy and girl on Sky (clueless and terrible at interviewing people!).
As for the racing - its good, but I do think Schumie has a point - the emphasis should be on the aero, engine/KERS and tires in equal measure not heavily in favour of one or other. Balance needs to be brought back to make it a more 'legitimate' form of racing. When the ambient temperature or track surface can play such a part in the outcome, it devalues the actual racing for me.
Having said that, its been good to see the engineers struggle with the aero and set-up to the point where he have had such varied races and winners. It will be good to see how things pan out by mid season once people get on top of the tires and their own issues. This could be a vintage year for many reasons - but am not sure it will be one to remember for the right reasons… Time will tell.
I'm also very happy to see Kimi back and fast!
Robin Matyjasek - Spain
Watching qualifying just to see which luminary of the day doesn't make the cut feels quite un-F1 to me - much as we all like to see the great and the pompous laid low every now and again, not as the main event every weekend. Technical gossip seems to have been entirely replaced by (a) the lack of heat in tyres, and (b) sideshows such as how teams must run their two cars with essentially the same race livery throughout the season and must seek prior approval for any major changes... (In 2nd position on the F1 website, so don't blame me.) I can never seem to keep track of who is on older/newer/harder/softer tyres, so I get a niggling feeling that perhaps my overtaking manoeuvre adrenalin rush is dissatisfyingly artificially induced. So is the future of F1 really going to be some sort of animated screen annotation to accompany apparently dicing cars to show how many laps each one's tyres have done? Happily the regulations covering our Sunday F1 barbeque have not changed but we tend now to chat more now and get distracted from the race. Can someone please let us know when F1 returns in case we miss it?
Ahmed Naas
Funny that we all perceive F1 differently. Some say:
Best Drivers racing on the best circuits in the world.
Is best when you're not sure who's gonna win.
Learning how to manage tires is key, all about strategy.
Me I see formula one as the pinacle of Technology, but most of all passion, history, gentlemen's sport, Mechanics working through the night...
I am a Ferrari fan and hated Alonso for "Blocking" Schumacher for the last 20 laps to win in Italy. Now that he's in Red he the best driver in history. For me F1 is all about the teams competing to be the best. Best is producing the best car. Best is having the best drivers. Best is when a young racer dreams about driving for that team. I love F1 for those last laps when a young Perez is chasing his hero Alonso in Malaysia.
F1 is never broken. Next year the rules will change and will find it: is some cases better / in others worse. Only real criticism I have in F1 2012 is the stewards / penalties given. How can you send Lewis from Pole to last because the team broke one rule... Anyway, F1 still rules. Forza Ferrari!!!!
Jason Charalambous - Phoenix, Az
I have seen some very interesting racing over the years but this year seems very strange. We have witnessed Formula One change its guidelines as to what can be used as materials to aerodynamic rules engine freezes and the list goes on. I fully respect Maldonados abilities and all the F1 pilots but when your are racing you have enough of a budget to go racing but Bernie's issue is that expenses are to high as teams push the boundaries of engineering, aerodynamics metallurgy and so on,so he foresees no one being able to afford to race so then he looses capital. The Pinnacle of Motor sports??????? Reigned in Manufacturers who can not show there true capabilities because a few money hungry mongrels wont allow them for a lose of capital in there pockets.
When humans are faced with something or someone who is a step above them or there team for example they cry foul and will find any reason to dislike them or the sport they are in and then show disinterest and refrain from watching or doing it just because that is human nature. Its easier to quit than to strive to be the best or at least say wow that Ferrari,Mercedes Renault etc is miles ahead of our car.
I will still watch F1 as I have for the past 20 or so years if not to enjoy it but to see how far it will be controlled.
Mike Knight
First race I've watched from beginning to end in a very long time. However it was contrived, it worked from a spectator's point of view, whether by accident or design I know not. It also put the drivers more in control of events. You talk of these tyres as a contrivance! Why then not question the effects of excessive down force? What's the point of that? The level of aero influence has been way over the top in motor sport for a very long time; too much grip is a negative for all but a few engineers and the less gifted driver. If this begins to get round that nonsense in a challenging way, I'm all for it.
Craig Holmes - Catalina AZ
The key to any endeavor involving more than one person is compromise. Motor racing is firstly sport but it also must be a show. The FIA has gone too far in their manipulation of the show in their effort to maintain and grow it's fan base, tilting the necessary compromise in favor of the show at the expense of the sporting aspect.
I agree with a previous writer who said to get away from an overly restrictive structure and let them race and if your engine grenades in a banzai pass attempt, so be it, that's sport.
In the end I believe that less tinkering with simpler rules is best for racing and that, in the long term, will lead to butts in seats at the tracks and in front of the TV.
Dave Maxfield - Gilbert, Arizona, USA
Well, looking back to Chris' earlier comments about long time viewers he knows not watching last Sunday's race, well, count me in too. Despite all except the Canadian GP being shown at inconvenient times for me (I live in Arizona, USA) I have raised myself at the "crack-of-doom" on a regular basis to watch F1. Not now, the rot started a few years ago, it has compounded (excuse the pun) this year with the tire nonsense. I hated KERS when it appeared, I've hated DRS since its introduction, and I hated the giant front wing, mini back wing, diddy V8 cars when they appeared. I continued to watch for a while, but why bother now?
The cars should be driven at 100% for the entire race, and when necessary at 110% by those truly gifted drivers. As far as I'm concerned, the best motor racing on TV is World Superbike, followed by both classes of Moto-GP. The best car racing on TV is Australian V8 Supercars, even though they do refuel and change tires.
Last Sunday, I did get up early, but I packed our kit and went off with my family to do an autocross at Firebird International Raceway. It was hot (about 100F), it was fun, we drove our Miata with gusto and I didn't even think about F1 or who won until Monday morning when I logged into Pitpass just to check. The result is good for Williams, great for Pastor Maldonado and maybe for the new generation of fans. For me its crap. But then I am old, very old, you see I watched Mike Hawthorn and Stirling Moss drive, I worked in the motor sport industry living a few miles from Silverstone, I even built a car for James Hunt back in the glory days of the 1970's. I guess now I'm just passed it: just a grumpy old fart who doesn't understand why people walk around with cell phones glued to ears or eyeballs; I don't Twitter or Facebook, my cell phone makes phone calls not merges me into the "collective," I suppose I may as well curl up toes … but then again it's still fun driving our somewhat underpowered but scrappy Miata through the cones even if my kids are regularly half-a second or so quicker now.
Alexis Mack - Guanajuato, Mexico
I think every one of this season's races have been good, exciting races but I also agree that its kinda artificial with the current Pirelli tires; seeing one driver overtaking the car in front just because his tires went down the cliff is, in my opinion, similar to seeing a Mclaren overtaking an HRT, not really that difficult or spectacular...
In my opinion it should be better if the tires could be raced hard for some 75% of the race length or really, really hard for some 60% of the race so you have to change tires at some point during the race but allowing more flexibility in the strategies and allow drivers to push the car to the very limits and not nurse the tires or risk losing ten places in a couple of laps like it happened to Kimi, I really hated seeing that happen.
The other thing I would like is that the stewards start making more consistent decisions and apply penalties according to the severity of the infractions not like the fiasco that sent Lewis to the back of the grid, this was really an outrageous decision by the stewards.
Last but not least, I would love to see Kimi win a race or two even when I'm a diehard Mclaren/Lewis/Jenson fan, fortunately this seems to be not so far away.
Ronny G Merkel - Arcadia, CA. USA
Well, I kind of stopped paying attenuation. F1 is becoming more and more like NASCAR and Indy cars. You have to use a V-8, use the same electronics as everyone else. If they could use a turbo they would have to use "pop-off" valves. The sport has become less and less a sport then a "business". I miss Jimmy Clark, and the world of racing BW, (Before Wings), when spec-car racing was for kids.
I don't miss the lack of safety. I don't wish for a return to "The Cruel Sport".
Mark Sainsbury - New Zealand
I love the biased misuse of stats: The drivers may not be driving at more than 95% of their reaction times/speed, but they have to channel that 5% to different skills now so they are still at 100% I would think. I'll explain how this is good below.
The winner is now based more on the human factor than on the machine. In the Ferrari/Schumi period, it didn't matter who else was in Car #2, the Ferrari's were for some seasons almost guaranteed a 1-2 in the race. The only excitement (and that waned as the years passed) came before the season as we wondered which car might challenge the Ferrari. Otherwise, the championship was already won at the first GP and there was little point beyond loyalty/purism/a love of cars in watching the season. The 'sport', the human skill had already been run before the 1st GP, in the development of the car... and that wasn't televised (thank God). After GP #1 it was simply accounting.
Now the drivers, the engineers, the strategists all have to apply their intelligence and physical skill 100% of the time for (I hope) 100% of the season. The best cars will still most likely win out (take a look at the top 6 of the drivers standings right now: 5 world champs and the 'top' 3 teams (McLaren, RB, and Ferrari). That doesn't seem like a lottery to me.
The competition is closer. The top teams will face more challengers. Each tier of teams will have to work harder to beat those below and in their tier. But that simply adds excitement, and from the standings, it hasn't compromised by becoming artificial. Anyone who suggests that the drivers aren't at 100% Is missing a much more exciting truth.
Greg Cunneen - Tokyo
Mixed feelings. Yes, the formula has been gimmicked into submission. Until they look at the area that everybody and his/her dog knows needs change (i.e. aero, in particular those ghastly gargantuan front wings), gimmicks are the only way to produce racing. So the Pirelli tyres are fickle, but that's still an even playing field, not like the Depressing Racing System (DRS) where one driver gets to use it while another suffers without.
I am not of the view that drivers should be racing 100% on the edge all the time. F1 has only ever been like that in fits and starts, mostly in Schumacher's era (which is why he is probably moaning about it). Go back to earlier eras and it was always about getting the car home, so that argument doesn't wash with me. Unpredictability is what tells me that teams are on the edge of development, but all unpredictability apart from tyres has been neutered.
So, is F1 in 2012 entertaining? Yes.
Is it the F1 I would most like to watch? No.
But all of those smooth aero surfaces are perfect for advertising. Good luck trying to get rid of some of them.
Peter West
All the points raised in your piece are my feelings also, the stage managed aspect of it all this emanates from the origin of the coverage The TV.
It was nice to see some one getting a just reward for genuine effort well done Sir Frank and your team.
The whole scene is I feel suffering from degree of detachment from the illustrious past of such a fine sport. As time passes momentous events of
days gone by are in our memories, these are usually events that are noteworthy by the difernce between one teams performance and another.
When the margin between the first and the 5th, is less that the time frame that ordinary people can contemplate.
Establishment of a pecking order becomes less menaingfull to those that dont have a bank of computer screens to display the merits of one driver and car as aposed to others.
Neville Menzies
There is no doubt that for sheer entertainment, the five races so far have been unprecedented. But is F1 a sport or just manipulated entertainment?
DRS, KERS and most of the aero packages should be banned, to encourage balls to the wall motor racing, where drivers race as fast and as hard as they dare.
What is the point of all the technology when drivers are asked to race at 80 or 90% to save tyres and/or fuel? F1 is not an endurance event.
There is enough technology now for Pirelli to understand the optimum tyre compound for each track, and to provide each team with only that compound. However many sets they require can be worked out. But perhaps they should be made to a spec that would ensure they are good for at least 10% above half distance. (Or one third distance if the powers that be require 2 stops) This would ensure a mandatory pit stop / stops. Obviously full wets and perhaps inters would also be available.
Fuel loads should be prescribed at 110% of race distance at full throttle! This would ensure there are no nagging doubts about making race distance.
We all understand that there are commercial interests at the core of all sport (such a pity) but with some clear thinking, the marketing guys could get creative and add value to this core.
Ivan Nikolic - Serbia
I don't consider this season as strange it is just that we get used to see one or two drivers win the races. I applaud to this season that we are witnessing. From entertainment and sport side everything is fine, maybe not 100% ideal but is nevertheless great.
We have 6 world champions, and field full of talented drivers. There are three main engine suppliers and exchange of technology. There is no reason that other teams like Williams, Force India, Sauber can not have talented engineers that can make good cars and setups. Everyone use same tires, same framework of regulations. The season just gives us some competitiveness that we lacked before.
It is the job of these people to understand tires, how their cars work. It is their challenge, it can not be excuse. At the end, all usual suspects are on the top, we see good battles here and there and I see nothing strange in this. Sport have lot of places for improvement but it is way better than it was couple years ago.
Opinions are split but I count every minute to next race.
Savraj Dhalay
This season is the most interesting that I can remember for a long time. I don't see how five different winning drivers, from five different constructors can be perceived as negative. I also don't buy the argument that F1 has become more artificial this year. F1 is constantly about adapting; whether that is weather conditions, rules or cars - the tyres are just part of that. Williams grasped the tyres better than others in Spain, and kudos to them.
Some people baulk at the idea of the theoretically fastest car not winning, but why should that be the case? In the early 2000's, the grid was very predictable - but who could honestly call that interesting? Let's not forget that fans have been yearning for exciting GP's for years, which the FIA fan survey showed in spades. One cannot manufacture a perfect scenario, but 2012 been far more interesting than F1 used to be.
The current Pirelli's have also negated some dominance of aerodynamics. Pirelli's compounds are now another powerful factor, which is shaking up the field a touch. I don't see how a casual viewer would prefer the more predictable F1, where mostly the same teams win, fill the podium and score points. Some have waxed lyrical about the era of no rev limit and tyre wars, but that was boring, and it resulted in an unsustainable spending war.
In terms of value for money; some dodgy, unpredictable tyres are producing exciting racing that aero rule changes have failed to achieve.
If I look back to Bahrain, the dual was kept alive by the fragility of the tyres. Theoretically, Vettel had the fastest car, but, Kimi's fresh tyres and the cars tyre usage kept him right behind Vettel. Are people seriously saying that they wanted Vettel to drive off into the distance?
Set-up and car performance is playing a big role in managing the Pirelli's. McLaren's tyres degraded more excessively than others in Bahrain, but whose fault is that? I praise the lesser funded teams/drivers who have quickly grasped how to get the tyres working over a single lap, and manage them during a stint, and, understand how temperature effects the tyres.
Lastly, I like the fact that drivers cannot drive flat-out from start to finish, like in some previous years. That style of racing simply created big gaps between cars, lessening the chances of on-track battles. As tyres drop off, battles slowly start to form. The Spanish GP was actually exciting for once; it was perhaps the best GP I've seen at Circuit De Catalunya.
If drivers whinge about tyres (i.e. Schumacher), it's usually good for the spectator. The driver wants the most durable, consistent tyre as possible - I as a viewer do not. What a spectator and driver want can be widely different.
Stuart Jones - UK
I guess like most fans I would support the idea of making tyres that can introduce different strategies and managing your tyres within that strategy has always been a crucial part of F1.
The problem with these current tyres is consistency. There appears to be such a small window of conditions that can "switch on" a set of tyres and give fantastic grip that each race track/car/weather/driver combination will throw up a different result. This some will say makes for entertaining TV, but you will find this view comes from TV commentators who have to fill in huge amounts of coverage. From a fans point of view this is not what F1 is all about. The races should be the best performing driver with the best developed car driving at 100% of their ability.
No-one ever said about Senna "gosh didn't he manage his tyres well in that race". Give the teams the tyres they deserve and us the fans the races we want to see.
Bill Willems - Bloomington, Indiana USA
Really got into FI when it was run at Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Loved it even the 6 car race during the tire debacle. I love it so far.. really not knowing who will win. Glad to see Kimi back, sad to see Ruebens gone but hey, I get to see him at Indy 500 this year and even shook his hand at practice last week. The FI cars are ugly, the tire situation is ??. I guess I still don't understand the 2 grades of tires for each race. Why not just develop one tire for each track and let it go at that? The no refueling rule is great. And just a note on TV coverage..Great on SPEED.
Martin Brownson - Hong Kong
As has been mentioned by many in recent days the last time we had 5 winners in 5 races was in 1983. I don't recall anything like this years reaction to the results-to-date happening back then. I tend to agree with some others who have posted that it's not the case that 2012's drivers are only driving at 90-95% but that they are using 100% of their skill to get the most from the package they have. If one team or driver gets to grips (no pun intended) with the tyres on any given weekend then they have done a better job and deserve the result. I don't think it's a lottery and I don't think Maldonado's win was necessarily a fluke. He has shown signs of potential future greatness and last weekend he kept it all together throughout the race and got the result on merit. So far this year we have seen lots of aggressive, attacking driving combined with careful car/tyre management when needed and I'm all in favour of it.
I may well change my opinion if I see an HRT finish in the top 10!
Morgan Rees - UK in Houston
I suppose, with the varied results we have seen thus far I should be happy that one team is not dominating. But I am growing more and more dissatisfied with what seems to be artificial.
One thing I always looked forward to in the seasons where one, or maybe two teams were dominant (and I'm thinking right back to the 60's now) was whether other teams were managing to get up to that level and mount a serious, CREDIBLE, challenge.
Formula One is all about technical excellence in engineering, and the best drivers at the wheel. To be shackled to driving at less than the maximum devalues the sport. Certainly, in the past, before planned pitstops, you would have "canny" drivers nursing their cars and tyres in the early stages to be able to push in the later stages (witness Prost's many surges through the field when at McLaren) and the question was whether they would be able to catch the "rabbits".
Somewhat to my surprise, I find myself wishing for the real battles of other teams struggling to get to the level of the dominant team and close the true gap, rather than this manipulated dumbing-down we have seen this season.
Jeff Sullivan - Seattle, USA
It is mixed for me also, on the one hand I agree with points others have made about DRS and tires etc, it just feels "gimmicky"...
Speaking of tires, one point I have not seen made is just how much garbage these tires dump on the track, just imagine your all time favorite wheel to wheel pass, whatever it is, trying to be executed in today's dirty section of the line... (Un)Fortunately, this is never an issue thanks to DRS and with these tires the likelihood of any two cars being equally matched for anything more then 1 lap is remote.
On the other, I am more interested in this season then I had been in the previous two, which were boring for me because it was obvious that Red Bull could not be caught very early on (which I find amusingly ironic as I became a fan of F1 during the Schumacher/Brawn/Ferrari juggernaut). Which I think points to where F1 has made a misstep and that is the in season test ban, in my time as a fan the most compelling seasons came from the ebb and flow of who had the upper hand, Hamilton and McLaren vs. Raikonnen and Ferrari in 07, Alonso and Renault vs Schumi and Ferrari in the years prior. The anticipation built from race to race, being glued to the Friday results to see who was going to be the team to beat that week.
Understandably this was for cost cutting reasons, but I can't see why they don't open up the Friday sessions, allow third drivers, plenty of tires, and designated testing engines, gear boxes, etc so there is no penalty for equipment failures. The money has already been spent to move all the the equipment, talent and personnel (namely safety personnel) there so make the most if it.
Obviously there would still be baser issues like, aero its affect on overtaking and other aspects that affect the "sport" but as others have implied the creativity and brains in those behind the pit wall are as big a factor in the magic as the skill and bollocks on those in front of it...
Rick Wang - Shanghai, China
I attended the China Grand Prix this year with my son and we were actually invited to sit inside the Mercedes team pits when Rosberg crossed the finish line, very exciting to be part of history! But in the history of the China Grand Prix, except for the maiden race 7 years ago, I have not seen so many people attending a race and with such excitement.
The so called "Lottery" or "Freak Results" may not necessarily be a bad thing for the sport of Formula One when certainly a one team domination is not what most fans want to see. No matter how you look at it so far, the top drivers and top teams are still very much in the front of the pack every weekend even with challenges involving tire wear. Remember the days when Ferrari was so dominant that you would go to sleep humming the national anthem of Italy almost every weekend, was that fun? Perhaps for Ferrari fans but even so, it became boring.
Mercedes and Williams standing on top of the podium does not make me wonder why, because they have been there before and have the ability to do so again. Now if HRT or Marussia ended up on podium, then I would say something is terribly wrong and it would be like a lottery. But to allude a Mercedes or Williams win a freak result is simply not a fair assessment, both teams have won previous championships before. I like what I am seeing so far this year, I like the fact top teams and drivers now struggle with tire wear, I like the fact mid-grid teams are finding ways to finish on the podium, and I certainly like the fact that so far, the championship can go to anyone. Well, maybe not everyone because I do believe at the end, the championship will be won by a top team and top driver.
But here we are, five races into the season with no absolute domination, no guarantee prediction and that I think is exciting, and keeps me interested in a sport I love.
Shinji Unno - Seattle, USA
I love the way F1 has gone so far. Pirelli and no refueling rule have changed F1 racing fundamentally. The current format will identify the champion who can manage tires and run fast in variable conditions.
Those who can drive fast only when the car and tires are perfect, i.e. Schumacher, will not win, as Schumacher himself admitted by criticizing Pirelli.
This year's format is also an equalizer for smaller teams. It's so difficult to balance the car. Even Red Bull's money can't buy it all the time. This gives more drivers a realistic chance to win if they can drive difficult cars in ever changing conditions. In this regard, too, this year's championship will be worthier than when Ferrari or any one team was steamrolling the competition.
Christopher Wright - Sydney
I have to say I am absolutely loving 2012. I have watched Formula One since 1980 when I was 13 years old.
2012 for me is the best season I have ever seen. With races on late at night here in Australia even my wife is now staying up to watch. In the past she would watch the first corner and then go to bed.
I do not believe the so called gimmicks are making it a lottery as many assert. As everyone has the same opportunity at the same time it is up to the teams and the drivers to make the most of it. This is very different to weight penalties and the like where teams are brought back to the field.
Qualifying is just that qualifying. That is why no points are awarded. You spoke about watching qualifying laps in the old format but back then teams would often play a strategy game. And it was very uneven back then. Some teams had qualifying engines. For many years only some teams were given qualifying tyres. So where is the fairness in that. That said a simple tweak to Q3 would fix things up. Just give the 10 cars 2 extra sets of options and away they would go.
I think everyone can get too caught up with things. We often need to just enjoy life more. For me right now Formula One is giving me that enjoyment. Long live Pirelli. Long live the DRS. Long live Formula One 2012 style.
Aditya Nowotny - Germany
To me, 2012 is already a classic season - like 1982 and 1983 were. The racing is close, there is a common challenge to everyone, and the team and the driver who solve this task the best consistently will come out on top.
Additionally we have the rise of a potential new super star - Pastor Maldonado - who is to say Pastor is not going to be another Juan-Manuel Fangio or another Ayrton Senna? He voiced forth already some very original thoughts, that he first wants to "build the world championship" with Williams before going to another team. Many other drivers would simply use Williams as a jumping board to enter one of the big teams. So watch out, Pastor might be one of the greats of the sport.
We have 6 WDCs and an excellent Kimi. We witness again his quality, whereas some others, who have enjoyed the benefit of superior material in years bygone are struggling. What does it tell us?
Most important of all, in 2012 we see that among the drivers Fernando Alonso has dropped the ball the least, and amongst the teams the team from Enstone is really delivering a consistently super job.
We see the weakness in the McLaren organization - on more than one level - the weakness in Red Bull when Adrian Newey did not get the chance (= rule change) to deliver one of his super concepts, the weakness in Ferrari on the technical side. What does it tell us?
We see that a team reorganization like the one initiated by Adam Parr, using top people like Coughlan and Gillan in the process can turn the fortunes of an ailing team around mightily. What does it tell us? Which other teams might be in need of a team reorganization like the one that was courageously done at Williams?
It tells us that quality prevails, driver-wise and team-wise. It tells us that 2012 has taken away many competition impediments and has put drivers and teams under a brave test - who can deliver the best under given rules and challenging conditions like this years tires?
None of the five wins so far were undeserved - Rosberg had it a long time coming, while Alonso, Vettel and Button showed their usual quality. Maldonado was mentioned already above and Raikkonen/Grosjean/Perez are probably still going to win this year - not undeservedly, IMHO.
Do not cry lottery!!! then, if and when Kimi and Sergio win, because their wins will be by merit as well. Do not use the lottery word at all - 2012 is just a reshuffle, that Dietrich Mateschitz of course does not like, but then: 2013 will present us with another reshuffle. One that might suit Adrian Newey again.
Dave Kane - Scottsdale, AZ
Extra set of tires for Q3 that can't be used in the race. It's stupid that 3 guys set out Q3 in the last race. Fans pay to see the cars on the track.
Luis Diaz
Hi. The championship is good, but it could be better. Proposal:
The place in the starting grid could be like this: starting place = aprox. of: {(x- y)+z}/2
(x=# of cars, y=place in championship, z=qualifying place).
an example: Vettel, let's say he qualifyes 1st: x=18 cars, y=1 in championship. {(18 - 1)+1}/2 = 9
Schumacher, let's say he qualifyes 18th: x=18 cars, y=18 in championship. {(18 - 18)+18}/2 = 9
When there's a tie, the one with the more points in the championship will take the worst place. Vettel will start after Schumacher.
I haven't checked more examples, but that's the idea. The equation can be altered to give more or less importance to qualifying .
The teams are not going to want to lose points just to start more in the front, and the qualifying will retain some importance.
Mark Frewer
I think most of the new gimmicks have helped to make F1 a better show, but I don't think that all of them are needed all the time. DRS should only be used in the race not in qualifying and all the cars should have to run and end qualifying with X amount of fuel with drivers have to complete a laps within 107% of 1st place in each session.
Refuelling should also be allowed as it allows for great use of different strategies and would allow the drivers to actually race in the opening part of the race. On the whole F1 has become more exciting but at a cost, you very rarely see any proper racing as the following car waits for the DRS zone and the lead driver cannot defend against it. But a regulation stabilisation has improved everything maybe it's time to get rid of DRS and see real racing.
Harry Papas - Greece
Here is what i missed most
Mat Coch... "Be careful what you wish for"
"Gritty determination of drivers wrestling monstrous fuel thirsty beasts while at the same time I want to see drivers on the ragged edge hurling the most technologically advanced motor vehicles in the world around for lap after lap."
Mike Pepper - UK
Any class of racing can be made competitive and entertaining by fiddling with the rules, just as they have been doing with F1. Things are far too tightly controlled and are even getting contrived. DRS is the equivalent of asking the bloke in front to move over and let you past, it is not competitive overtaking. It also robs us of the demon late-braking do or die attempts that the likes of Mansell and Senna gave us in the past.
Rules governing the number of cylinders and preventing engine development along with ludicrous controls over gear ratios do nothing to reduce costs, whch was the original thinking behind many of the current rules, because ridiculous amounts of time, energy and money go into aerodynamics instead. However, they do stunt the development of the cars. In spite of all of this, the big money teams are still at the front of the grid whilst the three new teams are still firmly stuck at the back. There is no way I'm prepared to spend 20 weekends watching today's F1 live, nor am I about to pay fro the privilege. I can only assume that I no longer form part of the audience Bernie is aiming at.