What a race!!!! Formula 1(Spoiler)

irishgeo

what a race the best race i have seen in a long time. The crash, the schuie montoya battle, the marnadi finishing etc. its the best race in a long time.

Poor jordan.

I watched the race on F1 digital + which made the race even better.

KdjaCL

was it worth it ?
I have been debating wheather to get it or not but last year wasnt a great race year and kinda put me off it
Kdja

GreenHell

Race was crap, should have been restarted after half the cars didn't make it out of the first corner.

mike65

The race ceased to be of any merit really after the pile up on the first corner. That said, great for the Oz fella Webber to pick up points in his first GP, he wont see many more in a Minardi.

Go here for reaction to the lack of a red flag
http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/020303/80/ct9l2.html

Funnily enough I did'nt miss Murray and Martin Brundle seemed to get more mike time. A good thing.

Mike.

GoneShootin

i agree, the ITV commentry is quite good, better than RTE of course

Dont be at yourself

Its a shame the race wasn't restarted, what with half the field taken out at turn one.

That said, I thought Montoya and Schumacher were going to give us a race until the tyres came into play. I would love to see Montoya on bridgestones.

Robbo

My ould fella shelled out for the Sky Digital package and I was impressed by it. I have used the actual digital feeds before at the American GP 2 years ago and what we get is more or less what they get at the track.

Ben Edwards and John Watson are good commentators , much better than ITV now that Murray's gone (James Allen lacks all charisma and Martin Brundle is too bland).

Trev

Originally posted by Robbo
(James Allen lacks all charisma and Martin Brundle is too bland).

I'd disagree with those comments completely. I always thought James Allen and Martin Brundle were excellent, and I still do.

bonkey

Originally posted by Kevin
its the best race in a long time.

Which goes to show how lacklustre F1 racing has become.

If you think about it, pretty much all of the racing was over by the first half.

Hopefully the rest of the season will improve a bit.

As for ITV vs RTE vs Sky digital....pfah. I have to watch it in fecking French, German or Austrian. Bah.

jc

chernobyl

Originally posted by mike65


The race ceased to be of any merit really after the pile up on the first corner.

Why?
The race begin with action and even before a restart there was more with DC's brake failure into T15 and immeditely the were battles between Schumi and Truilli which unfortunatley ended due to a suspension failure on the Rennault then Montoya stepped up and we had a great shoot out between th cream of F1 with Schumi evetually owning Montoya and the whole field.

Due to attrition that occurs there are never that many finishers in the Aussi (or 1st) GP, just look at last year and the year before?

Lots of cars does not equal a good race, but your no F1 fan so your talking bs m8.

Originally posted by GREENHELL
Race was crap, should have been restarted after half the cars didn't make it out of the first corner.

I agree that the race should have been restarted but the safety car was issued so quickly that the FIA were tied, it would have been preferable but who got wiped out?
all the "poor" teams, yes barrichello went and so did RSchumacher but you still has Schumi1, montoya, coulthard, Kimmi so the tops teams feautred, if they had not then yes it would have been restarted.

Originally posted by bonkey


Which goes to show how lacklustre F1 racing has become.

If you think about it, pretty much all of the racing was over by the first half.

Yes because its so exciting when the "racing" goes through the whole race where all the over taking is done in the pits..hmmm

Or maybe you compare modern day F1 to the senna/prost days?
Racing was not even flag to flag then.
Infact F1 has not changed for some 15 years in which the races are run so which great era of F1 are you thinking of?

bonkey

Originally posted by chernobyl
Due to attrition that occurs there are never that many finishers in the Aussi (or 1st) GP, just look at last year and the year before?

There is a significant difference between cars failing from various things one-by-one during the race, and almost half the field being wiped at the first corner.

Having said that, the FIA was correct not restart, as there was no danger to drivers or spectators once the initial crash itself was over. This line was made clear to the drivers before the race - that the only condition where a red flag would be used was where safety was an issue. It wasnt an issue here, so they didnt restart the race.

Infact F1 has not changed for some 15 years in which the races are run so which great era of F1 are you thinking of?

Coming from someone who has just offered "you're no F1 fan" comments at someone else, this is a bit ridiculous. You must be about the only fan of F1 who thinks that the sport hasnt changed significantly in the past 5-10 years, let alone 15.

While F1 has always been dominated by 1-2 teams at any given stage, the changes made over hte past decade alone have been staggering. The changing rules have all but rule out the "drag-style" racing we would once have seen - two cars neck and neck tearing up a starting straight, sparks flying out the back as their titanium base-plates bottomed out.

The aerodynamic changes, coupled to the grooved tires have more or less ensured that while speed is somewhat limited, the traction of the car is now almost entirely aerodynamic in nature - which has resulted in massive drops in the amount of overtaking done. I cant remember where I say it, but someone estimated that overtaking moves had dropped by over 300% in the last 10 years in an average formula 1 race. Whether or not this is true, it is unquestionable that cars cannot slipstream anywhere near as effectively as they once could, forcing the driver behind to sit further back from his opponent, thus reducing the number of places where he can try overtaking.

If all you're interested in is the title challenge in F1, then no, the situation has not drastically changed in the past 20 years - there will always be one or two (rarely three) dominating teams, and in most cases the championship contenders can be reduced to ast most 3 drivers by the start of any given season. On the other hand, if you are interested in the "mid-field" - the fight for whatever spare points the major players may not mop up - then F1 has become an increasingly sterile, processional racing medium.

The introduction of mandatory pit-stops really highlighted the emerging problem, as they added a missing tactical element to try and add excitement. However, since their introduction, their existence has become more and more key, to the extent that the FIA has been able to increasingly stymie the cars oerformance in ill-conceived ways, without due consideration for the race itself - because they've always had the buffer that pit-stops award. In almost every race, the lead will change, even if it is a meaningless change. A 20 second lead will win you the race, but may not keep you in the no.1 slot all throughout. So, without overtaking, we have lead changes. I remember Murray getting so worked up when a British driver (typicaly Coulthard) would take the lead during the pit-window, only to have MB tell him calmly that said driver was leading on ly because he had yet to stop - which didnt stop Murray raving about him leading for another few laps.

This, in some proples' opinion is enough. In most fans (and drivers) eyes, increasingly, it is not enough. We *know* the driver still has to stop, and therefore we *know* that the temporary lead change is meaningless, despite what the commentators may try and encourage us to get excited about.

F1 may never truly have had a modern golden era, but it becomes increasingly processional with every passing year. Yesterday's race was relatively interesting as recent races go, but when wee look at it, what did we actually have??? We had Schumi vs. Trulli, then Schumi vs. Montoya, then Montoya vs. Raikonen. That was about it. Of those three major clashes, we had 4 "position changes" - one from racing, one from pitting, one from Trulli losing his car, and one from Raikonen losing his briefly (allowing Montoya back into second). 3 cars, 4 changes. In two hours. This is not "highly exciting". This is "somewhat interesting".

jc

Ciaran

Originally posted by bonkey
overtaking moves had dropped by over 300%

So there are now a negative number of overtaking moves?


I thought the race was fairly poor. That may have been partially because I was really tired but I don't think so. There were only two battles that I can remember: Schumacher - Montoya (a foregone conclusion with the speed advantage that the Ferrari had) and Webber - Salo (Thrown away at the first opportunity by Salo). The lack of cars meant that the field was much more spread out than usual => no battles anywhere.

Great to see Minardi getting some points though.

mike65

Originally posted by chernobyl
Lots of cars does not equal a good race, but your no F1 fan so your talking bs m8.

I've thrilled and bored by F1 since before you were a boy my boy!
Back to the days when everybody got terribly excited by the idea of an Irish driver, remember John Watson, Martin Donelly poor old David Kennedy etc.

I wont go back over the race but with such carnage it should have been stopped, so something approaching a genuine race could take place which involved things like pit-stop strategy, overtaking and the like - with so few cars both were not nearly as important as usual.

Mike.

chernobyl

Originally posted by bonkey


There is a significant difference between cars failing from various things one-by-one during the race, and almost half the field being wiped at the first corner.

Not really when you consider the magority of who went out.
The drivers would rarely provide anything worthy of your viewing and in reality just make up the numbers, and does most certainly go for rubens and RSchumacher!

Originally posted by bonkey


Coming from someone who has just offered "you're no F1 fan" comments at someone else, this is a bit ridiculous. You must be about the only fan of F1 who thinks that the sport hasnt changed significantly in the past 5-10 years, let alone 15.

Originally posted by bonkey
..

I never said F1 has not changed but the racing has remained the same for years.
This is the first year i have seen a driver repay his overtaker by re-taking his position in maybe 5/6 years.
But you made a comment that "the race was over by half way" and suggested like you have seen many flag to flag races when in modern day F1 is impossible.

Originally posted by bonkey

While F1 has always been dominated by 1-2 teams at any given stage, the changes made over hte past decade alone have been staggering. The changing rules have all but rule out the "drag-style" racing we would once have seen - two cars neck and neck tearing up a starting straight, sparks flying out the back as their titanium base-plates bottomed out. .

Slip streaming days were numbered after the first F1 team purchased their own dedicated wind tunnel to run 24/7(williams)
Rule changes have been both sides of the coin, like grooved tyres which have not proven successful in increasing over taking but safety is much better.
Sparks flying out the back, yeah cool, but often that caused so many accidents because the cars would bottom out of quick flicks and turns so the cars have to have a higher ride height.

Originally posted by bonkey

The aerodynamic changes, coupled to the grooved tires have more or less ensured that while speed is somewhat limited, the traction of the car is now almost entirely aerodynamic in nature - which has resulted in massive drops in the amount of overtaking done. .

Speed is in no way limited.
Since today the cars have more BHP/can generate more aerodynamic grip and less drag and also have less friction with the road due to grooved tyres, the cars now go faster everywhere.
Why should traction not be mostly aerodynamic?
F1 just gets faster and faster so mechanical grip just becomes unimportant, cornering speeds are on the up, braking distances are almost back at 97 standards so over taking should start improving more and more, its just if the FIA screws it up again...

Originally posted by bonkey

thus reducing the number of places where he can try overtaking..

nah, 300 is way too high, but if you look at all the races you will see that cars are not really the problem its mostly the poor track designs that dont lend themselves to overtaking.

Originally posted by bonkey


The introduction of mandatory pit-stops really highlighted the emerging problem, as they added a missing tactical element to try and add excitement. ..

The pit was mandatory even if it was not a rule.
Just under extreme circumstances like 15 laps under the safety car where drivers could conserve fuel, but other wise no one could go without a pitstop.

Originally posted by bonkey



F1 may never truly have had a modern golden era, ..

mmm MM 1967...

danbert

Ever considered watching a Superbike race or even a gp500?
Both are far more interestin than Formula 1. Although I am still a fan of Formula 1, there can be no comparison made between the two as far as excitment goes.
In bike racing the emphasis is far more on rider skill that on bike performance.
A good rider can still go out and win a race wether or not he may be on the "best bike".
And as for lead changes, woah! They become boring they happen that often, it's not uncommon for the race to be won on the last corner, all very edge of the sit!! Excellent stuff.

Just give a look some time, I'm sure you'll be pleasantly surprised.

chernobyl

Superbike is ugly but the 500's are cool.

Max Biagi is the most over rated rider ever, always screws up at the worst time.

I dont know how you can compare F1 to bike racing, they are far too different and F1 is a much deeper and more complex and tactical sport.

F1 for ever!

danbert

What you mean to say is that it's boring!

chernobyl

The 500's are not boring, no way, but i dont have the understanding of it as i do with F1 so i dont really appreciate it.

Superbike is only cool on the TT, but thats just insanity!

bonkey

Originally posted by chernobyl
Not really when you consider the magority of who went out.
The drivers would rarely provide anything worthy of your viewing and in reality just make up the numbers, and does most certainly go for rubens and RSchumacher!

By this logic, F1 is only worth catching for the top 6 drivers...which is strange considering that Jos Verstappen hs the largest fan club of *any* current F1 driver. Obviously they dont agree with you.

Personally, I found last years "struggles" between BAR, Jordan and Sauber to be far more interesting than the top-flight teams. Not even when they were scoring points - the midfield cars are generally packed into much tighter groups in terms of relative performance, meaning that most of the actual interesting racing comes from the mid-field, rather than the leaders.

If we were to argue that its only the top dogs who are worth watching, couldnt we equally argue that F1 would be better off being limited to 3 or 4 teams rather than 12.

I never said F1 has not changed but the racing has remained the same for years.

No, it hasnt. With the exception of some really poor tracks which never allowed for overtaking, we have seen a year-on-year reduction in overtaking moves. This is not caused by vast differences in performance or driver skill, but by the mechanics forced on the teams to try and keep speeds under control.

Witness last year when Coulthard had massive problems having started from the back of the grid. He was held up lap after lap by a vastly slower car. Why? Because the aerodynamics prevented him from getting close enough to stick an overtaking move.

But you made a comment that "the race was over by half way" and suggested like you have seen many flag to flag races when in modern day F1 is impossible.

The entire race, for all cars in the field, was over by the half-way stage. Other than Montoya/Raikonen after the pits, I dont think there was a single overtaking move in the entire field in the olatter half of the race.

As for "flag to flag races".... again, you seem to think I'm talking about a challenge for the lead. I'm not - I enjoy watching the various teams, and seeing how they all get on. A fight for 10th can be as enthralling as a fight for 1st. If all I was interested in was the points winners, I wouldnt even bother watching the race.

I'm sure you would not be happy with the director of a race concentrating all his camerawork on the lead car, if it had a 30 second advantage, while there were numerous tussles down the field giving much more enjoyable viewing. I know I wouldnt be.

Rule changes have been both sides of the coin, like grooved tyres which have not proven successful in increasing over taking but safety is much better.
Sparks flying out the back, yeah cool, but often that caused so many accidents because the cars would bottom out of quick flicks and turns so the cars have to have a higher ride height.

I agree with increased driver safety, but the steps being used to limit speeds for this are to the detriment of the racing, not just limiting the speed. I mean, the body-shape changes introduced 3 (or was it 4?) years ago, resulted in faster straight-line speeds, but worse cornering. This was to try and strike a balance between speed (which the organisers mistakenly see as the attraction) and safety. Unfortunately, they forgot that the vast majority of overtaking manouevers occur in and around the corners ....which is where they crippled the car's performance (note that performance <> speed). Result - fewer overtaking manouevers. Result - a more processional race.

Speed is in no way limited.
Since today the cars have more BHP/can generate more aerodynamic grip and less drag and also have less friction with the road due to grooved tyres, the cars now go faster everywhere.
Why should traction not be mostly aerodynamic?

You're missing the point. Again, speed and performance are entirely different (though not unrelated) things.

The design changes have forced a reduction in mechanical grip, resulting in a greater reliance on aero. Now, at high speeds on the straight this isnt a problem - as the ITV guys often say - you could drive an F1 car on the roof at those speeds. The problem is that once you lose that aero grip, you no longer have *any* decent mechanical grip available. And where does this happen? Oh - when you're trying to close in on another car, or when you're taking corners at lower speeds. Which would be where overtaking occurs.

The changes to the car shape (longer, narrower) and the tyre changes mean that once a car loses speed or enters rough air its aerodynamic handling decreases to the point where the car cannot be controlled fully enough.

As a result, cars cannot get close on the straights, resulting in them not being able to make overtaking manouevers in corners.

nah, 300 is way too high, but if you look at all the races you will see that cars are not really the problem its mostly the poor track designs that dont lend themselves to overtaking.

I would agree that some tracks are terribly designed. However, even look at tracks which have largely remained unchanged and we have seen year-after-year reductions in overtaking.

The pit was mandatory even if it was not a rule.
Just under extreme circumstances like 15 laps under the safety car where drivers could conserve fuel, but other wise no one could go without a pitstop.

Actually, several teams were experimenting with designs which would have given them no-stop-tanks on many of the shorter tracks. This was what prompted the pit to be made mandatory.

jc

Mistakill

IMO it was barachelos fault. he cuased the pile up by pulling out infront of ralph. Ralph didnt have any time to stop (brake). im not a ralph schumacher fan but that could have endangered the lives of other drivers.

He should be penalised by being baned from the next two races.
thatll give Mclarens new driver (cant remember his actual name as of yet (hes new) abit of a good start fer the season him and weber.

the montoya-Schumacher battle was a class one once again proving montoyas capability to make class moves on the circuit. All he has to do is improve on the car (well not actually him) and hed be away.

Just to make it common knowledge id like to say............I HATE THAT PANSIE FUKCER MICHEAL SCHUMACHER!