FIA telemetry system to be fixed for Spain

F1 Fanatic round-up

Start, Shanghai, 2013In the round-up: After four races without it the FIA’s telemetry link to the cars is expected to be working at the Spanish Grand Prix.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

F1 cockpit warning problems resolved for Spain (Reuters)

“Formula One drivers have been promised a properly functioning electronic cockpit warning system for next week’s Spanish Grand Prix after problems prevented its use in the first four races of the season.”

‘Vettel effect’ concern for British GP (The Telegraph)

“Silverstone managing director Richard Phillips said on Wednesday that ticket sales for the June 30 race were down nearly 10 per cent on last year, when 297,000 people attended over the three days despite flooded campsites and torrential downpours.”

‘Lessons learned’ for British GP (BBC)

“[Silverstone managing director Richard] Phillips said Silverstone had invested ‘hundreds of thousands’ of pounds in improved drainage in car parks, making car parks larger for the same capacity and expanding the track’s park and ride schemes and coach access.”

Sick and tyre’d: Red Bull boss says F1 is being ruined by current rules (Daily Mirror)

Dietrich Mateschitz: “Today, it’s not the fastest driver in the fastest car who wins, but the one with the optimum tyre management.”

Caterham in no danger despite QPR?s costly relegation (The Sun)

“An insider said: ‘The two businesses have always been run separately, so QPR?s relegation will not affect the Formula One team.'”

The economics of F1 in Spain (Joe Saward)

“The [Valencia] race was not supposed to cost the taxpayers anything, but the money that was supposed to come from private developers never appeared and the local government had to chip in $104 million. To that was then added another $319 million in race fees, infrastructure costs and so on.”

F1 in pole position at the 2013 Goodwood Festival of Speed (Goodwood)

“Seven current 2013-season F1 teams are now confirmed to appear at Goodwood this year; McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes, Lotus, Caterham and Marussia.”

Why Robert Kubica is still missed in F1 (MotorSport, registration required)

“Whatever the rules, though, he would undoubtedly have been right in the mix. At Monza in 2010, not long before his pal?s disastrous rally shunt, Alonso told me he thought Kubica had ??the best talent of all of us??, and Hamilton, too, privately confided that he feared Robert more any other driver, the two of them having been rivals back to karting days. So that is how much of central figure F1 has missed in the last couple of seasons.”

Marketing: Does F1 need to work harder? (F1 Confidential)

“While the individual teams are doing a great job, Formula One Management Ltd (FOM) still needs to act in order to positively impact current viewership ?ǣ which in turn helps FOM command higher broadcast fee agreements so increasing the revenue and profit for both for themselves and the teams.”

Remembering Ayrton ?ǣ 19 years on (McLaren)

“Alongside him [on the podium at Adelaide in 1993], McLaren boss Ron Dennis also quietly ruminated on the end of an era before leaning over and whispering into the Brazilian?s ear: ‘It?s never too late to change your mind, you know…'”

Ayrton Senna (F1 Speedwriter)

“I think Formula 1 is very superficial, generally speaking. Formula 1 is today a very strong business, a way of promoting names and products…and people. Of course, there are a few special people here, but as much as I try to find those few special people, and to get through to them, I find it very difficult. Because consistently I find problems and troubles that I go through which tend to drive me away from personalities. So it is a very difficult environment to be part of. It is almost impossible.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

Is it really just younger fans who want gimmicks like DRS?

I don?t think its fair to keep blaming the younger generation for the direction the sport is heading. I am 21 and would much prefer things like DRS to be removed, and that is a viewpoint that from reading the comments on this site that a lot of young fans agree about. You are labelling a whole generation of fans with a tag that only applies to a minority.
Safeeuropeanhome (@Debaser91)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Adam Kibbey!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

On this day last year F1 was testing in Mugello and the fastest time was shared by two drivers – Romain Grosjean and Kamui Kobayashi:

Coincidentally the BRDC International Trophy non-championship race at Silverstone on this day in 1964 saw Jack Brabham and Graham Hill cross the line side-by-side at the finish, both given identical race times of 1hr 22?45.2. Brabham was declared the winner.

Image ?? Daimler/Hoch Zwei

Advert | Go Ad-free

93 comments on FIA telemetry system to be fixed for Spain

  1. D (@f190) said on 2nd May 2013, 0:08

    Have they tried turning it off and on again ?

  2. MNM101 (@mnm101) said on 2nd May 2013, 0:10

    seriously ? “Vettel Effect” ? seriously ?

    • Traverse (@) said on 2nd May 2013, 0:41

      seriously ?

      YES! It’s a well known fact that Vettel is responsible for everything that is wrong in the universe.

    • karter22 (@karter22) said on 2nd May 2013, 3:36

      You guys can joke about it all you want but the truth of the matter is that Vettel is not revered by all, some actually hate him to death and would love nothing else than to never see him win another GP, at least not for a looong time. It might sound ridiculous but that is what reflects on ticket sales.
      It´s totally understandable for everybody that doesn´t worship the ground SV walks on but it, for some odd reason, is unthinkable to his worshipers!

      I for one, back the Vettel effect as stupid the name sounds.

      • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 2nd May 2013, 4:25

        You guys can joke about it all you want but the truth of the matter is that Vettel is not revered by all, some actually hate him to death and would love nothing else than to never see him win another GP

        Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t go that far, but it’d be nice for him not to win any races for some time tbh.

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 2nd May 2013, 8:40

        @karter22 Last year’s wash out plus the slump in UK F1 viewing figures sound like more compelling explanations to me than the fact one driver has won 7 out of 24 races since the beginning of last year.

        • karter22 (@karter22) said on 2nd May 2013, 18:12

          @keithcollantine
          Sure, it´s also facts to take into consideration and I believe action has been taken so that last year´s situation won´t happen again in silverstone but, I guess 2011 really put a dent into some viewers. Yes he was one 7 in the last 24 and that to a lot of us is just too much. 2011 really killed it for me and I wish we never get a repeat of that any time soon.

          @kingshark

          Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t go that far, but it’d be nice for him not to win any races for some time tbh.

          Totally agree with you!

          @magillagorilla

          are you one of them

          Yes I´m guilty. I honestly am sick and tired of the whole finger thing. It´s getting old. At least Schumi varied the style in which he jumped on the podium, SV´s finger must be the most annoying celebration ever, that and the rind ding ding ding thing… grow up man!

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 2nd May 2013, 18:23

            @karter22

            Yes he was one 7 in the last 24 and that to a lot of us is just too much.

            Seriously? I mean, it’s not very much at all. It’s less than 30%.

            We’ve had terrific competition for victories since the beginning of last year. At one point we had seven different winners in as many races and some people were up in arms that it was too much.

            I really can’t agree with the idea that one driver winning 7 out of 24 races is anything close to excessive.

          • karter22 (@karter22) said on 2nd May 2013, 22:54

            @keithcollantine

            I really can’t agree with the idea that one driver winning 7 out of 24 races is anything close to excessive.

            Well, if you´re taking into consideration 2012, why don´t you take into consideration 2011 aswell and see what percentage you get!
            I for one, am fed up with SV. I can´t even stand the fact that the SKY intro to every GP has him at the beginning of it. I can´t stand that, it´s like we´re not watching F1, it´s more like “welcome to the SV/RBR show”.
            The kid, as I have said before is good, he can pull out some good drives once in a while and he gets lucky with the safety cars aswell but to have the intro focus on him and the RBR car is begining to be irritating. F1 is much more than just SV/RBR and I think that that is what they are reffering when they say the “vettel effect”. It´s getting to be irritating and annoying and it´s totally understandable that his supporters get worked up about it but it´s also perfectly normal for the other side of the fence to get fed up with him! Haven´t you been paying attention to the people booing at him on the podiums lately??

          • Mike (@mike) said on 3rd May 2013, 3:02

            @karter22

            Obviously you are not a fan, but don’t let it cloud your judgement. Otherwise you are no better than someone who would defend him no matter what.

          • karter22 (@karter22) said on 3rd May 2013, 15:37

            @mike

            Obviously you are not a fan

            Obviously I´m not a fan of SV but, I am a big fan of F1 Racing in general. Of course, my avatar shows which way my wind blows but that has nothing to do with my opinion about SV/RBR.
            My judgement is not clouded at all, it´s just that there are plenty of things that I´m uncomfortable with at the moment (tyres, DRS, tyre regulations, SV and his finger, RBR, sky intro, etc..).

      • MagillaGorilla (@magillagorilla) said on 2nd May 2013, 9:14

        @karter22 are you one of them…I mean I’m no Vettel fan but…the last person I wished to not win, ended up coming back from retirement and then I actually wanted to see him win. Strange how things work out.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 2nd May 2013, 7:19

      I fully understand it works that way @mnm110, first of all they describe that when the UK drivers are on a good run it helps sell tickets for the UK race, that makes perfect sense.
      And while most of us do admire what Vettel achieves with the car, going into the weekend expecting beforehand to have him put it on pole and see him back again when he takes the flag first really does nothing to incite interest in seeing it happen live for a great amount of viewers. I know how in 2011 at times I thought about even bothering to watch myself.

    • anon said on 2nd May 2013, 9:12

      You might joke about it, but the relative success of a particular driver has had a notable effect on attendance figures in recent years and has been noted as a phenomenon long before Vettel turned up.

      At Spa, the track owners claimed in the past that the retirement of Boutsen lead to a sharp drop in sales in subsequent years, and similarly in France the same negative correlation was noted when there were fewer French drivers and teams involved.
      Similarly, during Schumacher’s run of form from 2000 to 2004, attendance figures started dipping at some European venues whilst in Germany attendance figures steadily rose in that same period. Alonso’s success saw a marked rise in ticket sales in Spain too, and in the UK there was an upswing in tickets that coincided with the success of Hamilton and Button. The nationalistic effect may be reduced, but it still exists to a certain extent and does have an impact on sales – similarly, extended periods of domination where one driver is expected to easily win have been observed to have a negative impact on attendance figures.

      In the case of Vettel, a similar effect due to his success has been noted in terms of viewing figures – they declined in 2011 when he was at his most competitive, but in the races in 2011 where he wasn’t so competitive, viewing figures rose. In terms of the impact it has had on attendance figures, though, that is less clear – whilst ticket sales in Germany did pick up slightly in recent years, the circuit owners seemed to think that owed more to Schumacher’s return than to Vettel.
      The move to subscription based services on TV may have had more of an effect, but given that most observers expected Vettel to win another title (and, so far, he is currently on track to do so), I wouldn’t be surprised if it is indeed the case that Vettel’s success is having a negative impact on ticket sales at venues where he would be expected to win easily.

      • Atticus (@atticus-2) said on 2nd May 2013, 9:54

        I absolutely agree with this. It is not by any means intended to be detrimental to Vettel, it is just an effect of the successs the #1 package achieved. If it is there, of course.

        I also agree with the Schumacher dominance comparison.

        Even NASCAR had issues with this, I believe. One Jimmie ‘Five-Time’ johnson won 5 cups in a row, he is not a fan favourite so to speak, so his performance likely contributed to the viewership decline of NASCAR. Similarly, this year the level playing field is as strong as it could be – still, this time rather by coincidence, Johnson pulled out a huge lead and viewership goes nowhere, despite all the improvements to cars, racing, great stories and controversial moves, which are present.

  3. ScuderiaVincero (@scuderiavincero) said on 2nd May 2013, 0:15

    “Today, it’s not the fastest driver in the fastest car who wins, but the one with the optimum tyre management.”

    I for one am glad! Otherwise we’d see the same team and driver winning championships over and over agai- oh wait.

    • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 2nd May 2013, 4:54

      There was a period of time in F1 when essentially the most important part of the race was qualifying. The fastest car and driver won the race in qualifying on some tracks because it was nearly impossible to pass, except for in the pits. Unless it rained. I’m merely a fairly long time observer of F1 and most of the time a fan. Not saying it should be all one way (processional) or the other (too ridiculously easy passing), just observing that there should be a happy medium.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 2nd May 2013, 7:23

      To me, the next one is more important, and even worse @scuderiavincero

      “We’ve even had to scale down our car, because the tyres were not lasting.

      Red Bull had to adapt their car to the tyres (isn’t that what everyone does??)- so where does the driver matter less in this.

      I think its rather that the driver matters more, because it seems the hundreds of guys and girls watching the screens seem to not be able to make out exactly how best to optimize and tell the driver how to drive the car, that leaves them in the uncomfortable position of having to let the driver feel how it works and make the most out of it. Oh horror!

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 2nd May 2013, 9:38

      I’m OK with DRS, sometimes DRS zones are questionable and actually kill the race but I like the concept. However, I’d be open to a rule change favoring a certain number of times a driver can use DRS in lieu of a particular zone under certain circumstances.

      My problem with current F1 is 2013 spec tyres. I don’t like it, drivers are suppose to manage their tyres but not that much! Plus, 4 pit stops for fresh rubber seems too much.

    • Atticus (@atticus-2) said on 2nd May 2013, 9:56

      Rather “Today, it’s not ONE OF the fastest driver in the fastest car who wins, but the one with the optimum tyre management.” Oh wait…

    • Todfod (@todfod) said on 2nd May 2013, 12:56

      Today, it’s not the fastest driver in the fastest car who wins, but the one with the optimum tyre management

      Looking at the points table, one can only infer –
      Vettel is he best tyre manager on the grid.. and not the fastest driver on track
      I guess that also means Red Bull is not the fastest car on track…

      I dont know what DM is complaining about he has a great tyre manager and a not so fast car (apparently) and he is leading the WDC and WCC.

      Stop crying and go drink some Red Bull

    • Nigel Bates (@nigel1) said on 2nd May 2013, 19:24

      “Today, it’s not the fastest driver… who wins…”

      … but the one with the biggest budget.

      Nice to see your concern for the purity of the sport, Dietrich.

  4. yellowsapphire (@yellowsapphire) said on 2nd May 2013, 0:17

    ‘Vettel effect’? So it’s nothing to do with the organisational disaster that was last year? Or the fact that you need to re-mortgage your house if you want a decent spot? Nothing to do with that at all? C’mon, Silverstone, really??

    • beneboy (@beneboy) said on 2nd May 2013, 2:09

      It’s also nothing to do with the financial crisis and it’s definitely nothing to do with the British fans being unable to watch the full season live and in full without paying hundreds of pounds to one of Murdoch’s companies or the unpopularity of the tires/DRS/(insert your favourite gripe here) it’s all the fault of those damn German’s again !

    • AdrianMorse (@adrianmorse) said on 2nd May 2013, 6:19

      @yellowsapphire, you have to distinguish what Silverstone management say and how the Telegraph turns it into a headline. The headline suggests that people stay away because they are tired of Vettel winning, when Phillips says a Vettel win does not lead to a big increase in ticket sales:

      “If you look at the cycle on selling tickets … on the Monday after a grand prix Sunday you tend to see a spike. The weekend we had Lewis on the podium there was a spike and when you see Vettel there is less ofa spike,” he said, referring to demand for tickets for the British Grand Prix.

      “I think the needle-movers [for sales] are going to be basically ‘not Vettel’.

      So although all the reasons you list are possible explanations for why ticket sales are down, the winner on the Sunday before is just as valid a reason – and one that can actually be observed.

      • yellowsapphire (@yellowsapphire) said on 2nd May 2013, 14:46

        If that truly is the case, why did Silverstone, according to the article:

        have the biggest crowd of the season last year, with a record race day attendance of 127,000

        …off the back of a season completely dominated by Vettel? If this is truly the ‘Vettel effect’, I would have thought you would have noticed an effect in 2012, after his complete and utter dominance of the 2011 season. Instead, according to the article, Silverstone got record race-day attendance.

        This has nothing to do with Vettel, and everything to do with Silverstone’s pricing and the organisational disaster that was last year. They’re not going to admit that, though, as that’s classed as “bad PR”.

        • AdrianMorse (@adrianmorse) said on 2nd May 2013, 17:24

          @yellowsapphire, they didn’t say ‘Vettel effect’, though they did say ‘not Vettel’, which I think they shouldn’t have said. Instead, they should have said Hamilton and Button podiums sell tickets, which is hardly a stretch.

          As for last year, after four races into 2012, Hamilton and Button had chalked up five podiums, including one win, compared to Hamilton’s two podiums this year.

    • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd May 2013, 18:25

      It’s interesting he hasn’t made any mention of how an Alonso win the preceding weekend affects the sales, or a Räikkönen win. I presume really the spike is from a British win, and a non-British win doesn’t create that spike.

      Of course though, I think the Telegraph as per usual has made something out of nothing.

      @beneboy, @yellowsapphire +1

      • Mike (@mike) said on 3rd May 2013, 3:09

        I presume really the spike is from a British win, and a non-British win doesn’t create that spike.

        I think this is it, and would be true no matter where in the world you look at.

  5. Linda1 said on 2nd May 2013, 0:49

    me not going to silverstone this year has nothing to do with vettel, its purely down to my dislike of the drs & pirelli tyres.
    i have a few other members of my family & some friends who will not be going for the same reason.

    my youngest son has stopped watching f1 altogether as he dislikes how artificial f1 has become with these gimmicks :(

  6. Jay Menon (@jaymenon10) said on 2nd May 2013, 1:26

    Great article on F1 confidential…my conclusion is in agreement with the author. F1 is arrogant, it doesnt make an effort to reach out to businesses or the fans.

    I have a tough time defending F1, as majority of my friends and colleagues loathe the sport…in fact they dont even consider it a sport. That aside, it appears as if F1 just expect corporations to walk up and throw their money at the sport. It may hold true for now…but will it continue?

    The author makes a good point about how F1 needs China and the US more than the both of them need F1. Its very interesting when you look through the title/major sponsors of all the team, cant say there are too American..let alone Chinese!

    Red Bull – Austrian, Ferrari – Santander (Spain), Mclaren – Vodafone (UK), Mercedes – Petronas (Malaysia), Lotus – Cant say they have a standout sponsor, Sauber – Telmex (Mexico), Williams – PDVSA (Venezuela), Torro Rosso – Red Bull (Austria), Caterham – Airbus (Europe)/GE (USA!!), Marussia – Qnet (Hong Kong)

    Ok Ferrari is sponsored PMI and UPS both American, Wei Chai Power is Chinese. The rest of the teams dont have too many easily visible American or chinese sponsors on their cars. Caterham have GE emblazoned quite visibly. The point here is….the US and China are the two biggest economies in the world..perhaps F1 should be wooing more funds from these markets?

    • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 2nd May 2013, 6:27

      Interesting perspectives and conclusions. Basically, F1 (Bernie) makes the most money he can on the race deals themselves and the teams are left to their own devices to appeal to advertisers. Does Bernie really care how conducive the race regional locations are for the teams to logistically secure enough sponsorship to help ease their burden? How sensible is it for sponsors to make long term decisions not knowing where in the world F1 is going next.

      Could this be a contributing factor for the not so sharp end of the grid going after so many pay drivers? Which, in turn, can lessen the quality of racing. And yet, F1 desires to be the pinnacle of motor racing though not always acting in its own best interest concerning quality of racing.

      It does make good business sense for the teams and the sport itself to go where the most opportune economies are and the highest interest in F1 racing is. Developing markets are best when mixed with established markets for any business model.

      The bottom line is the fans pay the bill through tickets, licensing, sponsor product purchases… Basic economics.

    • MagillaGorilla (@magillagorilla) said on 2nd May 2013, 10:16

      @jaymenon10…How so? CNBC was on the Marussia for the past couple years then moved over to Lotus I think for this season. Then you have CNN that has been running on the Caterham for the past couple years as well. Verizon is Vodafone in America, which the McLaren runs in, well you guessed it America. Also Caterham had Dell and Intel. Then Ferrari now with UPS and before that Shell which is American based though it may be Royal Dutch, the shoe fits. Mclaren’s bigger sponsor if not the second or third biggest Mobil 1 which is ExxonMobil is american too, Gillette also. FI has Miller Welding company and one can make the arguments for alpinestars/Reebok I guess since it has a HQ in the U.S. and is a big brand in the U.S. spectrum. I forgot about lotus who have the most U.S. companies with Microsoft, Boeing, Symantec, Degree (Rexona), Vistagy, CD-adapco, avanande (which is just MS again really) and I think that’s it from what I remember off the car. RBR has a couple of US groups as well like AT&T. And Merc has Monster…which is all I can think of right now, they probably have a couple more though.

      Point is all the teams have 1 us sponsor, I didn’t put STR because they share a same sponsor with Lotus. Either way, there are plenty of multinational, non U.S. based companies that are well known in the U.S.

      • MagillaGorilla (@magillagorilla) said on 2nd May 2013, 10:18

        Actually I remember now, Merc GP also has the great Lincoln Electric Welding company.

      • MagillaGorilla (@magillagorilla) said on 2nd May 2013, 10:20

        I also forgot to say that I agree with what you’ve said as far as, F1 always thinking that outside groups or actual companies will come to them. Either the team or the group in general. Thus making drivers bring the sponsors to them, instead of branching out and working deals more often.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 2nd May 2013, 12:03

        Ehm,

        Shell which is American based though it may be Royal Dutch

        – Shell is very much British – Dutch, its main offices have been in the Netherlands ever since Royal Dutch Oil and Shell had their merger before they moved to a UK base recently @magillagorilla, otherwise I think your point is well made about both US companies and companies focusing on the US market are present in F1.

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 2nd May 2013, 10:41

      On F1 needing China and US more than those countries need F1 credit should be given to Martin Whitmarsh who is very critical to current F1 marketing effort. There’s so much being done arround the world even within F1 and FOM still acts like it’s 1985!

      While the individual teams are doing a great job, Formula One Management Ltd (FOM) still needs to act in order to positively impact current viewership – which in turn helps FOM command higher broadcast fee agreements so increasing the revenue and profit for both for themselves and the teams.

      I don’t get why F1 doesn’t run a YouTube channel full of videos of the past and present day F1. Indy has very good content online, so does NFL or NBA. Look at what F1 teams are making, look at what brand Red Bull is making.

  7. kcarrey (@kcarrey) said on 2nd May 2013, 1:32

    is Dietrich Mateschitz implying that Pirelli is the 2013 constructor champion?

    dear Dietrich Mateschitz, so as long as you need wheels to race, you need to manage those tyres, regardlessly.

    stop whining.

  8. Adam Blocker (@blockwall2) said on 2nd May 2013, 2:42

    but not really……..

    It was supposed to be fixed in Malaysia, then China, then Bahrain and we still haven’t seen it work yet.

  9. Umar Majid (@um1234) said on 2nd May 2013, 3:21

    Dietrich Mateschitz: “Today, it’s not the fastest driver in the fastest car who wins, but the one with the optimum tyre management.”

    Red Bull are leading the drivers and constructors championship because they have the optimum tyres management. If they have the optimum tyres management then why is Red Bull
    constantly pushing for changes. They are leading because they are the fastest on merit not because of tyres. Flawed logic Mateschitz

    • Kelsier (@kelsier) said on 2nd May 2013, 7:39

      I think what he’s trying to say is that Vettel is winning despite not being the best or fastest driver.

      • David-A (@david-a) said on 2nd May 2013, 8:06

        That logic would only work if Vettel didn’t win on Bridgestones.

        • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 2nd May 2013, 9:10

          Dude, and it’s not as if the RB6 was equal to the MP4-25 or F10 in speed.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 2nd May 2013, 11:57

            @kingshark – *rolls eyes* – Well, @kelsier seemed to infer from Mateschitz’s comments that Vettel is winning on Pirellis without being the fastest driver, all in order to have a dig at the 2010 world champion. Yet he missed DM’s mention of the fastest car also not winning. So you could as easily infer that the Red Bull hasn’t been the fastest or best car either.

        • Kelsier (@kelsier) said on 2nd May 2013, 12:13

          Yes, since Redbull and Vettel has been the most consistant winner in the Pirelli era therefor DM’s comments must be a dig at his own team.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 2nd May 2013, 12:44

            @kelsier Well, you only have to look at them starting to win before Pirelli, to disprove that. Either DM wants Red Bull to win more easily (true), or he doesn’t like the sensitivity of the tyres, like a sizable number of fans (possibly also true). I think the teams ought to just get on with it, to be honest, since the teams usually figure the tyres out, and can push, like late last year.

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 2nd May 2013, 10:07

      The leading teams is not happy wih those tyres… it says a lot. And for that I respect “Mr. Red Bull”.

      They’re doing their best to race on those fragile tyres, but they dislike it and everybody to know.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 3rd May 2013, 8:24

      Perhaps Dieter is actually a F1 fan and prefers his F1 without gimmicks despite still winning.

  10. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 2nd May 2013, 6:13

    I can kind of see Mateschitz’s point, in that the Pirelli’s are mixing up the results a little more than the ‘purists’ are used to, and that the drivers are driving to conserve rather than to be quick, but…

    At the same time, it seems a bit rich coming from Mateschitz considering Red Bull is leading both Drivers and Constructors championships.

    If RBR were in serious trouble with the tyres, like fighting for the last few points in each race then Mateschitz might have a stronger point, but they’re not. They’re more times than not the quickest car on the grid.

  11. graham228221 (@graham228221) said on 2nd May 2013, 6:15

    Agree 100% with COTD.

    It’s not some ‘yoof generation’ that these gimmicks are aimed at. It’s the much more vague ‘casual fan’ that FOM are desperately trying to cater for.

    The type that have never or have only very rarely watched F1 before. And when they randomly flick over to it, unless something is crashing they will complain that it’s “just cars going round and round”.

  12. andae23 (@andae23) said on 2nd May 2013, 6:51

    Some comments regarding COTD: I wouldn’t blame the younger generation for things like DRS. I think F1’s audience in general has changed. Formula 1 has become more accessible for people to come and watch the sport. I’m not sure, but I imagine it used to be something mythical, something you had to put effort in if you wanted to follow the sport. I think television, and later internet has contributed to this massively.

    But there is a downside to this: F1 has started to behave like a genuine TV program. So if the viewer ratings are low, the program will eventually get cut. Combine this with an audience that is very, very demanding (requiring constant excitement) and you basically get a recipe for disaster.

    So indeed, it’s unfair to blame the ‘younger generation’ as a whole. In fact, I wouldn’t go as far as blaming any group of people. F1 has just evolved over time and ended up as it is right now. Yesterday I said this: F1 should make up its mind whether it wants to be a show or a sport, but not neither. And I think that that’s where the real problem lies: there is basically no vision behind the F1 we currently watch.

    Also, I’d have liked to have seen Girts’ comment become COTD, but fair enough :)

  13. DaveF1 (@davef1) said on 2nd May 2013, 8:45

    Yes Silverstone, because Vettel is totally responsible for your ridiculous ticket prices…

  14. Martin Fuhs (@chapor) said on 2nd May 2013, 9:40

    I am starting to get sick and tired of all the talk about gimmicks and artificial racing caused by the tyres and DRS. I watched a couple of episodes of Retro F1 on ESPN Classic the past couple of days and it is very much apparent that tyres were a great issue back then as well. Many drivers lost out, or gained an advantage, due to tyres that started to degrade. Those are the good old days right? So please tell me why everybody is moaning about the demise of the good old days of genuine racing?

    And the DRS was the logical evolution of teams artificially creating dirty air behind their cars to keep faster cars behind them. But that was ok right?

    I get the feeling that F1 fans are a bunch of hypocrites. We moan about the boring races, FIA does something about it, we moan because it is “artificial”. Well guess what, F1 is artificial in every possible way. Everything is created. If you want pure natural racing go watch guys taking each other on at a marathon.

    F1 these days is a fair competition with a set of rules that is the same for everyone. He who works around the problems the best way, wins. Easy as that. The best driver with the best car combination wins. It is up to the other teams and drivers to create a better combination.

    So instead of moaning and b*tching about how bad and gimmicky everything is and how it is “destroying” “your” sport, be glad that the borefest of the early 2000’s are well and truly over and the racing is more involved than just getting the pit stop strategy right.

    • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 2nd May 2013, 12:36

      +1 million!

    • F1-Dave said on 2nd May 2013, 13:41

      be glad that the borefest of the early 2000′s are well and truly over

      The early 2000’s were never a borefest though.

      There was great racing & a lot of real overtaking in that time. OK schumacher & ferrari had 2 years of dominance (2002/2004) but that does not mean the racing was a borefest.

      as to the tyres & the classic races, yes tyre management was a factor but never this big a factor. niki lauda has been quite vocal on german tv about how never in his f1 career did he had to drive as far below the limits as what the current pirelli tyres force drivers to.

      the current level of tyre management is too much, there driving around to a preset laptime, there been told not to race cars around them & there now lapping at gp2 speeds just to manage the tyres.

      as to drs, its the most ridiculous & more artificial gimmick ever introduced into any racing series.
      watching the car behind get into a pre-detmined zone while within a pre-determined gap & then push a button & cruise easily past the car ahead isn’t fun, exciting or interesting to watch & has zero racing value. its a complete farce which add’s zero value to the racing.

      maybe those who love drs so much should go watch oval racing or even drag racing instead & leave f1 gimmick free for the real racing fans who want to watch some proper racing!

      also worth pointing out that despite f1 supposedly been ‘boring’ in the pre drs/pirelli era that the tv audience was growing worldwide & that its been the introduction of these 2 gimmicks that has seen the worldwide tv figures decline perhaps showing that people don’t appreciate the sorry excuse for racing f1 is now putting on.

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 2nd May 2013, 15:26

        maybe those who love drs so much should go watch oval racing

        A big part of the reason why I enjoyed IndyCar so much last year (and this year, though there haven’t been any oval races yet) was because it was DRS-free and, to my mind, less artificial than F1 has become.

    • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 2nd May 2013, 18:30

      @chapor that doesn’t mean we can’t find a happy medium: I personally feel the racing in 2011 further towards the middle was great, even despite the DRS influence. So why Pirelli were tasked to take that to new extremes at the expense of harder racing confused me.

      Back to DRS though: it was intended to be a stop-gap solution until the real solution came about with the 2014 regulations, significantly reducing aerodynamic effect and hence dirty air. That is no longer happening, which is why us F1 fans are getting rather irritated. Besides, the DRS I feel isn’t needed at all with these tyres…

    • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 3rd May 2013, 23:19

      There are plenty of good old days years where the racing was horrible too. When Bridgestone started their last stint, the tyre were horrible as well. Drivers were complaining about being pelted by the marbles all the time. In the end they got the stuff together and produced a tyre that didn’t break down so much.

      FIA should not have let Pirelli turn the tyres into a lottery/joke. They had DRS already, why add two ways to aid overtaking when you could understand upfront that those two wase were going to cause trouble when used together.

  15. Gordon (@gfreeman) said on 2nd May 2013, 10:23

    What “F1 running” was Heikki doing at Magny Cours?

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.