Forum Replies Created
17th February 2015, 23:14 at 11:14 pm #292268
I think some people here got it backwards. The _Manor’s bid_ for “return” was a business proposal. Marussia sold much of its assets last year. According to media, the proposal did not include any suggestion how this was to be remedied, nor did it feature any information on financial side of the deal.
If somebody really were serious about resurrecting the team, they could have done it in December, when the infrastructure was still there. So to me it looks like somebody figures that for a few million’s investment they can run an old car in 2015 (perhaps one race would be enough?) to be eligible for Marussia’s prize money of 30M. A nice rate of return. So far I have not seen any indication that anything more substantial is in the works.
As a sporting fan I see no reason to support this and therefore I cannot really blame FI for not going along with it. Force India did not kill Marussia, because one cannot kill a corpse.19th January 2015, 17:00 at 5:00 pm #29052512th January 2015, 21:54 at 9:54 pm #290246
I agree that prominent numbers should be required.
I looked at my seasons overview and see that large, very prominent numbers visible from the side (on sidepods, rear wings, or sometimes on engine cover) were the norm until the early 1980’s, when some backmarkers would run some races (like ATS in 1982) without side numbers, but still with very prominent numbers on noses. These were rare exceptions.
Things started to go wrong in the early 1990’s, when the numbers moved (with few exceptions) from sidepods to rear wing sides, where their visibility depended heavily on the viewing angle. In 2000, Prost discarded with numbers entirely (the wily Prost again! :-) ), in 2002 more teams joined and things went quickly bad.
Since this was the time when I stopped following F1, I have no idea why this happened. Perhaps teams felt that everybody can recognize Schumacher and the others do not matter anyway :-).4th November 2014, 21:51 at 9:51 pm #283505
Side-step: rather than a single season, I think following a single driver might have its appeal. There’s some high drama just waiting for a Hollywood-style tear squeezer (like Stewart grooming Cevert to be his heir, only to lose him just when the time was right).4th November 2014, 21:34 at 9:34 pm #283504
I agree that 2009 has too much going on for a movie.
But it would make a great mini-series.5th October 2014, 14:57 at 2:57 pm #277165
My earliest definite F1 memory: A ball of fire after the start at Monza in ’78. I remember that those beautiful black-and-gold coffins on wheels were my favourites then and I had been rooting for Peterson, so I had to follow F1 before that already, but I have no particular memory I could point to.
Actually, this is my only memory pertaining to a particular race (with few exceptions much more recently). After Peterson’s death I was interested more in cars and seasons then drivers or races, I remember rooting in vain for Ligier JS 11 and I was really happy when Williams FW07B won in 1980, that car had a low-key elegance that sticks with you.1st September 2014, 22:11 at 10:11 pm #273025
My Top 5 F1 cars:
Lotus 79 (1978)
Williams FW07B (1980)
McLaren M23 (the verson of 1974)
Ligier JS11 (1979)
Ferrari 156 Sharknose (1961)
Obviously, I have a weakness for the late 1970’s – early 1980’s, in fact more than half of the cars from 1979-1982 would be strong contenders for my Top 5. There were also many awesome liveries to be seen in those days.
I actually do appreciate smoother lines of later seasons, but the raised noses (and snowploughs) ruin the cars for me. Still, a honorable mention is due, the balanced lines of McLaren MP4/13 (1998) almost made me overlook the nose and put it into the list.8th August 2014, 16:55 at 4:55 pm #269701
I am not sure social media is crucial (though it would help). I can see a much bigger impact if they ease up on copyright restrictions, like if they stop hunting videos on YouTube, make more footage available etc. But even that is, IMHO, just secondary. I think the main problem is elsewhere.
When I was growing up in the 1980’s, we were technology minded. Many of us made flying models, many of us made our own weapons for play (crossbows, swords and such), quite a few boys also enjoyed putting together various electric contraptions. And of course, most classmates were heavily into cars. They knew what kind of engine one would find in this or that car, they were interested in new models of various makers, they wanted to drive them not to get somewhere, but to interact with this technology. Races were thus a natural interest and Formula 1 was the top. Our generation could relate to F1 in many ways, it wasn’t just the glamour and thrilling races (thrill being supplied most often by acccidents).
Today’s generation is into technology as well, but of different kind: They are putting together web pages, programming games for mobiles, or just spending their time in front of the screen playing games. For many of them, car is just a tool to get from point A to point B. Formula 1 has pretty much no connection to this world. While it is true that for this new generation, social media are the preferred channel of communication, first you actually have to somehow make them interested in F1 so that they have reason to join the F1 social media (if there were any). I think this is the core problem and I offer no advice how to face it.21st June 2014, 18:15 at 6:15 pm #263888
I see it just like @roald. Brown’s advantage was mainly in its double diffuser which hid its shortcomings, but once the other teams caught up, Brown faded away. This strongly suggests that Brown missed their train in the nose area.
If I were a dictator (of F1), every car with a raised nose would get 3 seconds added to its qualifying times and during each race its driver would have to stop every 20 laps and apologize to viewers for insulting their eyes with such an ugly car.5th June 2014, 0:12 at 12:12 am #262300
Used to drive across southwest (USA), going through my tape collection, and eventually the winner became clear: AC/DC’s Highway to Hell. Kept me awake, gave me amazing energy and rhythm, the only trouble was that I got caught speeding a few times because of the song. In fact, the whole record was great for driving. Now I play it while driving my family around and kids started to like it, too :-).29th May 2014, 20:05 at 8:05 pm #262011
Max Chilton – 0 WDC’s 0 Wins 0 Poles, retires mid-season in 2018 after starting in and finishing his 100th consecutive GP.6th May 2014, 21:32 at 9:32 pm #259026
Some details on the Czech Republic.
I have no idea what the original contributor meant by “not free to air”, so I’ll leave explanation to him/her.
TV Nova is a private channel that broadcasts on our default public terrestrial DTV multiplex, therefore it is free. It broadcasts all races that are not at night (I assume the list given above is correct, never cared to compile one).
The broadcast is interrupted three times for commercials, and given that most races have boring periods that can be reasonably well predicted, they usually manage to fit them in reasonably well.
The commentator is so-so. It is a guy who has been doing it for years, so he does know about the sport, but sometimes he misses interesting developments in a race and is not as funny as he thinks he is. I guess he’s reasonably OK. He has usually another guy on the line who actually worked in McLaren for some years and still has his contacts in the paddock, so he does have interesting things to say. I gather it’s this other guy who gets interesting stuff (caps, used gloves etc.) and pretty much every race there is some sort of a quizz for these prices running on their dedicated F1 web site, so I guess the Czech F1 fan does not have it really bad.
For qualifying one has to go to Nova Sport, which is a pay channel. I prefer to watch it streamed online.25th April 2014, 15:47 at 3:47 pm #258182
Just a little historical perspective:
The 10-8-…system mentioned above was the least rewarding ever for the winner, no surprise as it came at the height of Schumacher dominance, the #1 to #2 ratio was 1.25. The current system’s 1.38 ratio is comparable to the 8-6-… system from 1950-1960 with its 1.33.
The most used system 9-6-… had ratio 1.5 (1960-1990), in the next decade the 10-6-… system rewarded the most, the ratio was 1.67.
I am partial to the 9-6-.. system, but I do not mind the current ratio either.
Speaking about a dominant team, another number of interest is what share the 1-2 finish yields of the total available:
8-6-… gives 58%
9-6-… gives 60%
10-6-… gives almost 62%
10-8-… gives 46%
25-18-… gives 39%
So the current system makes a “one dominant team season” last longest before the WCC is mathematically over.20th February 2014, 6:56 at 6:56 am #249185
Obviously Senna’s death had an impact, but I think that most of the safety push came earlier, in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. Stewart (and Watkins) feature prominently here. Track procedures changed considerably, from impact-absorbing fences to medical facilities. One prominent change in cars was moving the front axle to a position in front of driver’s feet, which helped tremendously and incidentally (and unfortunately) made the cars longer. At the end of the 1980’s people thought that F1 had became safe, and indeed, most of the things that do make it safe were in place already.
Senna’s death started phase two, with focus on making the cars sturdier.8th February 2014, 15:23 at 3:23 pm #248539
everyone is permitted to express their opinion and behave in a manner one sees fit, whether that’s in Antarctica or Western Europe.
Actually, no. The spread of this particular belief is one of the major problems for the atlantean civilisation (Western Europe, Northern America). Every country/nation/cultural circle has its views on how people should behave, and as long as these views are applied equally to all, there is nothing wrong with them. Respecting them is not a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of understanding the workings of a society. That’s something old-fashioned called “manners” and – as one good American writer wrote (special bonus for whoever can guess his name) – loss of manners is a sure sign of society in decline. Above all, you are expected to respect local custom when you go somewhere.
A working society is a matter of give-and-take, there are no rights without obligations, which is something too often forgotten. We now live in a society where “Children’s rights charter” hangs on the wall at every classroom, but many teachers are actually scared to go to work.
Re: Russia and gays in general. I live in the Central Europe and in the past decade or so I have witnessed a veritable attack by a (part of) gay community on society. I can see where this stems from, it is not easy to be a gay (especially in a post-communist country) and a more tolerant society would be nice, but a certain very vocal group chose a very strange way to go about it. This attack is not easy to counter, as they use the “human rights” umbrella very effectively. It is too strong even for the taste of a substantial part of the gay community (incidentally, one of my relatives is gay, so I get some insight here). It’s one thing to want to be respected as a human being, and it’s another thing to openly attack people’s sensibilities. To see that some things go too far, entertain a little switch: Imagine a bunch of heterosexuals, half naked, walking the main street wearing signs like “I love doing it from behind” or “My tongue is the king”. What would you think of them? Would you like your small children witnessing this? In short, a large part of society feels itself threatened, more so in Russia that has never been a very liberal country. The law discussed above is a direct consequence of that fear, a backslash. It’s a simple case of pushing too hard, sometimes is does more harm than good. I strongly suspect that the international pressure in this direction is only going to make it harder for local gays there.