Forum Replies Created
8th October 2014, 21:44 at 9:44 pm #277710
@KeithCollantine I fully support that decision. Thank you a lot for the professional approach during these difficult days.8th October 2014, 19:44 at 7:44 pm #277704
Here is a video that I took at Hockenheim this year. I did not think it was worth sharing back then but now I just want to say that I was worried about the safety of marshals that were taking care of Adrian Sutil’s car and I think the video shows why:30th September 2014, 11:41 at 11:41 am #276339
This is simply ridiculous.
If FanBoost is an “element of interaction between the fans and the sport”, then so is “OMG, this is the best day of my life, Justin Bieber just followed me [after I had begged him to do it for like 10000 times. After all, who cares that Justin Bieber is never going to read any of my tweets?]”
Are motorsport fans really that childish? Pressing a button to show your support for Heidfeld is no “interaction” and shame on Agag for fooling the fans.
Anyway, I wonder how this is going to end. Agag might not care about polls but what if the same drivers keep getting the FanBoost again and again? I was not surprised to see Bruno Senna win the first vote as he has 659 000 followers on Twitter. For sure, other drivers can work to increase their popularity but it is impacted by a lot of factors out of their control, such as the size of their home country. And how will the other fans react, seeing that their favourite driver has no chance to get that extra boost? Agag might get a lot of “interaction” on Twitter and Facebook after all, I am just not sure if he will love to read it.15th August 2014, 9:11 at 9:11 am #270502
I basically agree that it is not right to upload copyrighted material to YouTube or similar websites. You should have to pay for watching exclusive high-quality footage of F1 or Premier League, just like you pay for books or opera tickets.
However, I believe that fans should still be allowed to share videos that they have filmed themselves and that FOM should also upload much more footage to F1.com and at least some part of it should be for free to attract new fans and to not alienate fans, who cannot afford to pay. Otherwise the “protectors” are really nothing else than killjoys.6th August 2014, 14:17 at 2:17 pm #269600
I think that part of Ecclestone’s strategy to keep F1 popular (and make money for himself and his employers) is to keep it unreachable, namely, to make people long for it. F1 is something exclusive; if you want to get close to it (or even watch it live), you will have to pay. If you want to be a part of it, it will cost you millions. This strategy has worked for a long time as fans, circuits, sponsors and governments have kept spending their money on F1. YouTube, Facebook and Twitter are for free, accessible for everyone and would bring the sport closer to its fans, which is not what Ecclestone wants. After all, F1 is popular on social networks anyway – just look at the number of illegally uploaded videos on YouTube and trending hashtags (like #BernieEcclestone yesterday) on Twitter…
However, this strategy is risky, too. The world is everchanging and falling spectator numbers are already ringing alarm bells. Moreover, as @andae23 says, there are a few things that F1 could SELL and earn even MORE money, yet they are not doing that. Perhaps Ecclestone believes that things like double points will attract new spectators and everything else can stay as it is but I would not be so sure about it.6th August 2014, 7:59 at 7:59 am #269579
I agree that the likes of DRS and fragile tyres should not be put in the same basket because non-durable tyres do not directly handicap any driver or team. However, they do change the racing; for instance, they lead to more passes and more pit stops. Pirelli themselves also used to talk about the need to “provide a better show” by providing challenging tyres to the teams.
Do tyres that degrade quickly affect competitive order? It seems so. Red Bull became much stronger after Pirelli changed the tyres in the middle of 2013 and I also doubt if we would have seen seven different winners in the first seven races of the 2012 season if Bridgestone had still been in charge.
And how much can teams realistically do to adapt to sensitive tyres? Adrian Newey said last November that Ferrari and Lotus had simply “got lucky” with the original 2013 tyres although not everyone would agree with him.
If a gimmick is defined “a trick or device to attract publicity or trade”, then I would still call the “raw eggs” a gimmick but maybe it is a good gimmick if there is such a thing!29th July 2014, 10:02 at 10:02 am #268618
Success ballasts are not the worst thing that could be implemented. The rule works pretty well in the WTCC.
For sure, it does not make sense to let teams spend gazillions of money to gain competitive advantage and then take part of this advantage away. But if the teams cannot agree on significant cost-cutting measures, let alone budget caps, then success ballasts at least let the smaller teams, who simply lack resources but are otherwise as good as Ferrari or McLaren, get some rewards, too.
That said, I am not sure that the rule would always work in F1 and I do not think that F1 really needs it.
As for the other “gimmicks”, it is complicated. I do not like most of them but I admit that racing sometimes benefits from them. For instance, the Bahrain Grand Prix would perhaps have not been as exciting without the DRS this year. Tricky tyres have sometimes contributed to good racing, too.
However, there are red lines and things like double points, the new Chase format and Fanboost overstep them. I want races to be interesting but when I want to watch some funny nonsense, then I watch Penguins of Madagascar, not F1.23rd July 2014, 11:36 at 11:36 am #267862
I do not know if the Russian GP should be dropped but everyone should stop pretending that “sports and politics do not mix” and openly talk about violations of human rights in Russia and the role of Russia in the unrest in Ukraine and MH17 plane crash.
Journalists should ask uneasy questions and drivers should demonstrate their stance as well. For instance, they could incorporate a Ukrainian flag or a rainbow flag into their helmet designs. The winner of the race could dedicate the victory to all the people that have suffered from the actions of Putin’s regime. Jean Todt should at least admit that Russia is not a democratic country.
But I am afraid that none of that is going to happen.23rd July 2014, 8:36 at 8:36 am #267855
It is true that the new F1 engines have become less loud, that you do not need earplugs anymore and that GP2 is now louder than F1. However, they are still louder than the person next to you, the crowd and the commentators. I do not think the new sound (at Hockenheimring) was particularly “interesting” but I do not think that F1 has lost much either. I think you get pretty much the same effect as earlier, only without earplugs.
Maybe the critics of the new engines have a point but there are also positives as some people, who avoided F1 earlier because of the unbearable noise (e.g. parents with kids) might now come to races.
I respect every opinion but claims that people now do not come to races because F1 is too silent or that this is a more important issue than high ticket prices, financial difficulties faced by most teams or even smoking in the grandstands seem to be a bit too far-fetched.22nd July 2014, 9:27 at 9:27 am #267706
@KeithCollantine Agreed, just like many other fans (and drivers), I expected to see a safety car as there were no sufficient “gaps” that one could use to safely get rid of Sutil’s car.21st July 2014, 19:11 at 7:11 pm #267665
Here are a few pictures from my trip to the race:3rd July 2014, 11:23 at 11:23 am #265208
Read Keith’s discussion with Marc Priestley. Indeed, “the best way to understand your own opinion about these things is to debate it with someone else.” It is a nice debate but I am still on Keith’s side, 100%.
From the discussion:
What it does do is push drivers and teams to engage with their fans, to exploit the social media platform and to work hard at it
I believe it is a terrible way of engaging with fans and only reveals complete lack of imagination if they could not think of anything better. I unfollowed Rebellion Racing in February because my timeline was full with their requests for votes in the Shorty Awards. I do not want to follow spam accounts. I also believe that drivers should not “exploit the social media platform” if they do not want to do it. Would we really want to see Raikkonen and Vettel join Twitter just to beg the fans for #fanboost? (Not that I think they would do it.) If a driver does not feel like posting stuff on Twitter, FB or Instagram, just leave him alone.2nd July 2014, 8:34 at 8:34 am #264993
And considering the ‘FanBoost’ is just for a single, 2.5 second boost that may or may not result in an overtake to begin with, is it really all that ridiculous?
I think it is a matter of principle. ‘FanBoost’ is something completely different from double points, DRS and standing restarts. These rules might be dumb but teams and drivers can still work to improve their cars or driving techniques so that they get maximum results. ‘FanBoost’ has nothing to do with the car or driving skills, it is a popularity contest. You might as well give 5 extra points to the driver, who has the hottest girlfriend.
As for “taking it easy”, I get your point of view and hope that other racing series do not start to adapt all the funny stuff…1st July 2014, 11:11 at 11:11 am #264986
NEVER. In fact, I am not going to watch Formula E as long as they do not get rid of “fanboost”.
There are plenty of shows and TV series on TV and I really love some of them. However, when I watch a sports channel, I do not expect to see “Farmer Wants a Wife” or “The X Factor” there.
If you let fans decide, which driver gets a boost or which football player gets a red card, then you can do that but please do not call it a sport.9th June 2014, 11:21 at 11:21 am #262863
Yesterday, Daniel Ricciardo became the first new winner since the 2012 Spanish Grand Prix, which was won by Pastor Maldonado.
So I guess it’s the right time to reopen this discussion!
In my opinion, these are the most likely candidates (from the current drivers):
Kevin Magnussen – It will be surprising if one of the McLarens manages to win a race this year but sooner or later the team should return to the top, given its budget and people. I think McLaren are unlikely to drop Magnussen anytime soon so if he can up his own performance, it is likely that he will get his chance.
Sergio Perez – The Mexican was not that far away from his first victory yesterday.
Nico Hulkenberg – His first podium finish is most probably overdue but is the car good enough for more and is Hulkenberg good enough for a better team?
Valtteri Bottas – Just like Force India, Williams could probably win a race this year, given the right circumstances. However, it’s difficult to predict the future of the team and the driver after 2014.
Romain Grosjean – Grosjean clearly deserves better equipment and Gerard Lopez has expressed his concerns that Lotus might lose him. The Frenchman is still highly rated and has been close to the victory already a couple of times.
Daniil Kvyat – If Vettel decides to leave Red Bull after 2015, then Kvyat seems to be the most likely replacement (at the moment).