F1 Fanatic

The gap was about a hundredth of a second. How is that ‘boring’?

Glad you managed to not get either me mentioning Schumacher let Barrichello past, or the Wikipedia article mentioning that…

While the championship battle in 2010 was intense, the race itself was largely uneventful. I think you’re watching F1 in an entirely different mindset than me.

As for boring races being a myth, talk to anyone who watched F1 in either 2002 or 2004. I was a Schumacher fanatic as a kid, but I actually turned off the TV during several races in 2004.

How does more overtaking make races ‘more interesting’?

How does more overtaking make races ‘more interesting’?

A few reasons off the top of my mind:
- Seeing drivers change positions, or make an effort to trade places, is visually appealing, and injects energy into what would otherwise be a lifeless procession of cars circulating in a single file.
- Overtaking comes across as a demonstration of added driver skill. Proficient overtakers like Kobayashi and Hamilton are usually considered entertaining to watch.
- Overtakes create memorable highlights of the race that fans will remember (examples being Hakkinen on Schumacher in Belgium, and Massa on Senna in Singapore). As opposed to a race without overtaking, which is less likely to produce such “moments”.
- What would be the alternative? A race with no overtaking, and by extension, no challenges for the lead, and no change in the running order, would most definitely be less interesting to watch than a race littered with overtaking, like this year’s Brazilian GP.

I believe the 2002 Japanese Grand Prix had zero (nope, that’s no error) overtakes throughout the whole race. I remember watching this race Sunday morning, when I was a kid. I was a Ferrari fan, but even for me that was a horror show.

Although in my opinion, what really makes F1 exciting is a competitive field where many cars can win. In 2002, every race was the same crap. Schumacher leads Barrichello, the Williams’ of Montoya and Ralf behind, then the Mclaren’s of Raikkonen and Coulthard, then a very noncompetitive and spread out midfield, then Minardi. The whole season in general was a dreadful disaster, all the more ironic given that the season following it (2003) is still, to this day, the best F1 season I’ve ever seen.

If I could chose between having overtaking, versus having a competitive field. For me, the decision would simply be too difficult.

I agree.

China 2011 was a perfect balance between competitiveness, overtaking, and an exciting battle for victory. It had every ingredient necessary for an awesome race, and delivered.

Amazing to think though, how the highest rated non-weather affected Grand Prix, since Keith started these polls in 2008, was held on a supposed modern day Mickie-mouse Tilke circuit in Asia with no one actually interested in the sport. The main grandstand was full.

Purely out of curiosity; how would F1 fans perceive Monaco, if it was designed by Herman Tilke, and just newly added to the 2012 calendar? That’s now an even more interesting question, given that the 2012 race on this circuit was a borefest.

Likewise, how would people perceive the Singapore night-race, had it been on the calendar since 1950?

People don’t like change, and people like to complain. That’s the truth.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2012/05/27/rate-race-2012-monaco-grand-prix/

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2012/06/05/monaco-grand-prix-receives-lowest-rating-2012/

The rest of this blog doesn’t agree, unfortunately.

@joey-zyla Why did you find it to be such a good race?

This overtaking-obsessed group drives me mad, sometimes.

Tell us, then. What is it that you look for in a Grand Prix? F1 wouldn’t be much without overtaking. Watch some races from 2002, and you’ll see just how bad it can get.