Formula 1 2017: General Discussion Thread

skipper_G · 26-03-2017 05:40PM

LIGHTNING wrote: »

^

Vettel gets that all the time its comical. Like you just automatically win WDC's.

I can openly admit to not being a Vettel fan same as my stance on Hamilton. That's just because Alonso is my boy.

But anybody who says Vettel isn't a great driver is delusional. The guy won a race in the Toro Rosso on merit. You don't win a world title by accident never mind 4. He is a great driver by any measure.

El_Duderino 09 · 26-03-2017 07:05PM

v3ttel wrote:

You dismiss Vettel and his 4 world championships because the Red Bull was dominant (58% win rate for that car in 4 years).

I'm not dismissing anything. I'm considering events outside championship wins.

v3ttel wrote:

Maybe because Vettel had a few average years (2014, 2016) by his standard (in a terrible 2014 Red Bull that he spent more time pushing than driving & when he was driving it, he was 80 bhp down) yet you give Hamilton a free pass for the 5 years that he finished 5th, 4th, 4th, 4th with the second fastest car?

Vettel has had very little else except some good performances in a TR including the Monza win. 4 years in a dominant Red Bull and since then he has struggled. Including being beaten by teammates in 2/3 seasons.

v3ttel wrote:

You've literally taken all of the bad from Vettel's career, all of the good from Hamilton's career, and decided that one is top level and one is not. Today further makes a mockery of that of that.

I've not done anything of the sort. Vettel has performed great for a few years and poor/average for a few more years. If he gets back to great performances for a few more years then that would prove his greatness. Other than that you can only really say he won titles in a dominant car. It's not like he was wringing performance out of a dog of a car like Alonso did in 2010, 2011.

Today was one race and contributes little to the discussion of how great a driver's career is. The same way any one drive can be discounted as an outlier (button in Canada was a great performance but it was an outlier as you didn't expect him to do anything like that on a regular basis). If it gets repeated throughout the season then it will speak volumes. Vettel should be handily faster than Kimi which he wasn't last year and he finished the season behind him. I don't think anyone would say Rosberg was actually faster than Hamilton last year though he did finish the season marginally ahead of Hamilton. I think a lot of people (including myself) were cheering for Rosberg because he was the underdog against the faster Hamilton.

v3ttel wrote:

For me, Vettel, Hamilton & Alonso are the three best drivers on the grid as it stands.

Yeah they are. But not necessarily in that order. Hamilton has wrestled performance out of good cars and crap cars. So has Alonso. It will be great if Vettel can do the same. Since he has lost the dominant car he has lost to his teammate 2/3 seasons so he would need to address that for a start, wouldn't you agree?

TCP/IP · 26-03-2017 07:27PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=garHCkp12v0

Love the way Seb is so interested in the other cars always looking to learn.

v3ttel · 26-03-2017 07:48PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Since he has lost the dominant car he has lost to his teammate 2/3 seasons so he would need to address that for a start, wouldn't you agree?

Well no, actually I wouldn't agree at all.

He beat Kimi in 2016 & 2015. He won the title in 2010->2013. He beat Webber in 2009. He beat Bourdais in 2008. He even beat both teammates in 2007 despite having half a season.

I have no idea where you are getting this "lost to his teammate 2/3 seasons" from. That's the one fact you offered up and it's wrong.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Vettel has had very little else except some good performances in a TR including the Monza win. 4 years in a dominant Red Bull and since then he has struggled. Including being beaten by teammates in 2/3 seasons.

Yes, if you exclude his four championship wins, outstanding performance in a Toro Rosso, his 3 wins in a vastly inferior Ferrari in 2015, he has done very little.

jayo26 · 26-03-2017 08:47PM

Who is the best driver and Hamilton is a prick thread all rolled into one?

Anyone see a formula one thread?

boardsuser1 · 26-03-2017 09:12PM

jayo26 wrote: »

Who is the best driver and Hamilton is a prick thread all rolled into one?

Anyone see a formula one thread?

Hamilton got booed again I see.

T-Bird · 26-03-2017 09:12PM

jayo26 wrote: »

Who is the best driver and Hamilton is a prick thread all rolled into one?

Anyone see a formula one thread?

Agree completely with this. I used to enjoy reading these threads and making the occasional comment. Now it's just a sickening sour taste reading all the hate about drivers. We all have opinions and are entitled to them.
But more and more it seems like a 70s school ground spat. Just so full of negativity and begrudgery.

Harika · 27-03-2017 10:14AM

Overtaking might be a real problem in 2017, like Ocon was 27 km/h faster than Alonso in topspeed and couldn't overtake him, only when the McLaren broke down.

recyclebin · 27-03-2017 10:36AM

Ocon was probably driving too conservatively. Any of the top drivers would have got by a lot easier. Having said that, overtaking is going to happen a lot less this season, no matter which car you drive.

boardsuser1 · 27-03-2017 12:35PM

Here is an interesting one for you all, the last time Ferrari won in Australia when it as the curtain raiser (2007) they won the title.

Any betting person here willing to bet on a repeat of that?

flazio · 27-03-2017 12:58PM

skipper_G wrote: »

I can openly admit to not being a Vettel fan same as my stance on Hamilton. That's just because Alonso is my boy.

But anybody who says Vettel isn't a great driver is delusional. The guy won a race in the Toro Rosso on merit. You don't win a world title by accident never mind 4. He is a great driver by any measure.

Completely agree with this, Hamilton is a stunning driver on track but a bit of a douche off track. Vettel is great fun off track when things go right but on track when things don't go right, that's when he's the douche, Mexico last year for example, As Steve Jones put it he was the guy who put the "eff" into F1.
So on that basis my guys are the Red Bull guys. I've no issue with Verstappen driving style and Ricciardo is a top bloke.

One thing you might have missed, Allianz have left F1 completely, no more blue and white line in the pit-lane, no more blue Parc ferme and no more sponsor stings in front of EirSport coverage.

skipper_G · 27-03-2017 01:04PM

recyclebin wrote: »

Ocon was probably driving too conservatively. Any of the top drivers would have got by a lot easier. Having said that, overtaking is going to happen a lot less this season, no matter which car you drive.

Ocon didn't race in Australia last year so the track was new for him. First race in a new team at a new track for a teenager trying to overtake Alonso. Even thinking about it is daunting! I think you're right he was probably not taking any stupid risks, more important for his confidence to bring the car home.

Joeface · 27-03-2017 01:20PM

skipper_G wrote: »

Ocon didn't race in Australia last year so the track was new for him. First race in a new team at a new track for a teenager trying to overtake Alonso. Even thinking about it is daunting! I think you're right he was probably not taking any stupid risks, more important for his confidence to bring the car home.

That Kinda re enforces the Idea I have that Qualifying should only happen for the First Race of the season . Ocon should be rewarded for Getting the car home and In the points. Next Race your grid start position should be your classification from the previous race .

It would help with over taking and the race for position . China would see Riccardo and Stroll Having to battle back up into the points . Ok I am stretching with Stroll there but it is more powerful than the Honda and Haas cars and the Sauber. Maybe I am dreaming again but do believe it would help.

boardsuser1 · 27-03-2017 02:29PM

OSI wrote: »

Limiting qualifying to the first race would only end the season earlier. Look at the previous years were Rosberg or Hamilton had to start much further down the pack after qualifying that resulted in them missing out on top points and prolonging the championship race.

Would people not prefer the pre 2003 system where it was basically a 1 hour shoot out between them all?

Harika · 27-03-2017 02:34PM

KC161 wrote: »

Would people not prefer the pre 2003 system where it was basically a 1 hour shoot out between them all?

Nope, was it was limited to 12 laps, what was stupid to begin with. And quite often, nothing happened for 20-30 minutes and then everything happened in the last two minutes. Or if it rained after the first minutes, 50 minutes nothing. The quali we have now, is one of the things that work best.

skipper_G · 27-03-2017 02:56PM

Harika wrote: »

Nope, was it was limited to 12 laps, what was stupid to begin with. And quite often, nothing happened for 20-30 minutes and then everything happened in the last two minutes. Or if it rained after the first minutes, 50 minutes nothing. The quali we have now, is one of the things that work best.

100% agree with this, qualy works fine as it is and no need to change it. Remember the last time they tried

Jordan 199 · 27-03-2017 07:21PM

I can see Giovinazzi relpacing Wehrlein at the Chinese GP if the latter can't get his back sorted out.

PopePalpatine · 27-03-2017 07:25PM

It's disappointing to see Wehrlein do so poorly, considering how hyped he was before his F1 debut. I honestly won't be surprised if he'll move onto Formula E.

mickdw · 27-03-2017 08:24PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

It's disappointing to see Wehrlein do so poorly, considering how hyped he was before his F1 debut. I honestly won't be surprised if he'll move onto Formula E.

In what way is he doing poorly. I do think like the chap but he did well in the manor I thought.

boardsuser1 · 27-03-2017 09:29PM

mickdw wrote: »

In what way is he doing poorly. I do think like the chap but he did well in the manor I thought.

I think he means with regards his personal health.

PopePalpatine · 27-03-2017 10:19PM

KC161 wrote: »

I think he means with regards his personal health.

That, and Ocon put up a great fight against him when he was promoted to a race seat at Manor. I fear that Wehrlein could be playing catch-up to the rest of the drivers' fitness for a while.

muckwarrior · 28-03-2017 09:59AM

Wehrlein didn't even look that impressive compared to the lowly rated Haryanto. I'm not surprised Merc didn't consider him as a replacement.

strawdog · 28-03-2017 10:00AM

Harika wrote: »

Overtaking might be a real problem in 2017, like Ocon was 27 km/h faster than Alonso in topspeed and couldn't overtake him, only when the McLaren broke down.

http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/351111/opinion-don-t-judge-2017-overtaking-on-opener/

Link to another more positive take on the apparent overtaking difficulty in 2017 along lines quality can be better than quantity for racing. As everyone more or less qualified in position it didn't come in to play in Oz but when you have people jumping up the order (eg due to wet qualifying or race incidents) could lead to interesting races as no more easy pickings. Maybe a bit optimistic but certainly gives the guys further back a bit of hope/motivation as Magnussen points out

TheDoctor · 28-03-2017 11:14AM

I'll wait till after China and Bahrain to judge the overtaking issue.

Two circuits with a lot the last few years.

geotrig · 28-03-2017 11:35AM

Harika wrote: »

Nope, was it was limited to 12 laps, what was stupid to begin with. And quite often, nothing happened for 20-30 minutes and then everything happened in the last two minutes. Or if it rained after the first minutes, 50 minutes nothing. The quali we have now, is one of the things that work best.

Its probably works best from what they have tried but there are probably more options out there....

I would like to see qualifying run like they run skiing compt . 1 car on track 1 fast lap (3 altogether , 1 out lap, 1 fast lap ,in lap) running order could be decided in whatever order they see fit.
It would give all cars equal "tv time" for qualifying anyway, less expense on teams ,random conditions could spice up order up as well as any mistakes are costly.

Harika · 28-03-2017 11:46AM

geotrig wrote: »

Its probably works best from what they have tried but there are probably more options out there....

I would like to see qualifying run like they run skiing compt . 1 car on track 1 fast lap (3 altogether , 1 out lap, 1 fast lap ,in lap) running order could be decided in whatever order they see fit.
It would give all cars equal "tv time" for qualifying anyway, less expense on teams ,random conditions could spice up order up as well as any mistakes are costly.

You might be very new to F1, but we had this system already and it was sacked for a reason or several. One, no one wanted to watch a backmarker anyway, so you tuned in for the interesting parts where the top teams were on track.

errlloyd · 28-03-2017 11:52AM

geotrig wrote: »

It would give all cars equal "tv time" for qualifying anyway, less expense on teams ,random conditions could spice up order up as well as any mistakes are costly.

So yeah, this was the universally panned system we used back in 2005 and was universally panned by fans.

Basically your running order was the inverse of your finishing position in the previous race. Tracks usually "rubber in" so going later was seen as advantageous - on top of that it is just handy to have a point to aim for.

Mistakes were obviously super costly in Qualifying, but also the week before. If you retired, you would end up having to qualify first or near the start. So a retirement in one race might take you two races to recover from.

Additionally rain completely ****ed it. Rain before quali, and those qualifying first simply couldn't compete. Rain during quali, and whoever went out right before the rain was on poll, and those who came out after got steadily slower.

It was a disaster.

PopePalpatine · 28-03-2017 11:58AM

TheDoctor wrote: »

I'll wait till after China and Bahrain to judge the overtaking issue.

Two circuits with a lot the last few years.

TBH I don't have a lot of hope for those tracks, they both have high-speed cornering sections which will string the cars out.

geotrig · 28-03-2017 12:10PM

Harika wrote: »

You might be very new to F1, but we had this system already and it was sacked for a reason or several. One, no one wanted to watch a backmarker anyway, so you tuned in for the interesting parts where the top teams were on track.

errlloyd wrote: »

So yeah, this was the universally panned system we used back in 2005 and was universally panned by fans.

Basically your running order was the inverse of your finishing position in the previous race. Tracks usually "rubber in" so going later was seen as advantageous - on top of that it is just handy to have a point to aim for.

Mistakes were obviously super costly in Qualifying, but also the week before. If you retired, you would end up having to qualify first or near the start. So a retirement in one race might take you two races to recover from.

Additionally rain completely ****ed it. Rain before quali, and those qualifying first simply couldn't compete. Rain during quali, and whoever went out right before the rain was on poll, and those who came out after got steadily slower.

It was a disaster.

ha ,no been watching since the mid 80's ,:pac: I just don't hold the information in my head for that long anymore ....I had wondered when I was typing it that I vaguely remembered something similar but thought it might have had an added " f1 slant".
It seems to have been tried when i lost alot of interest for a while in the 2000's mid 2000's ,I hated those stripped tyres... and the looks of those cars

I suppose its like alot of things in f1 ,alot sounds good on paper in therory ,its just how it translates to track and how the teams interpret that bit of paper and what is writen on it that screws it up.:D

H3llR4iser · 28-03-2017 01:23PM

errlloyd wrote: »

So yeah, this was the universally panned system we used back in 2005 and was universally panned by fans.

Basically your running order was the inverse of your finishing position in the previous race. Tracks usually "rubber in" so going later was seen as advantageous - on top of that it is just handy to have a point to aim for.

Mistakes were obviously super costly in Qualifying, but also the week before. If you retired, you would end up having to qualify first or near the start. So a retirement in one race might take you two races to recover from.

Additionally rain completely ****ed it. Rain before quali, and those qualifying first simply couldn't compete. Rain during quali, and whoever went out right before the rain was on poll, and those who came out after got steadily slower.

It was a disaster.

I frankly find the current qualifying format to be utterly boring and pointless on TV - having followed F1 religiously since the mid'80s, now I find myself tuning in just for Q3, as I'd bet most do, because nobody cares who starts 11th. It has a point for the spectators at the track however, it brings a more action packed session with cars always on track and it's slightly easier to follow.

But I'd love a return to the "1 hour open track" format and qualifying tires (the 12 laps rule was a "stopgap solution" created in 1992 to prevent the 30ish cars running at the time from clogging up the track for the whole hour after qualifying tires were discontinued), as it really showed which drivers had the "knack" for going out there and nailing a perfect lap at the right time. Now it's "rinse, repeat".

And the 1-at-a-time format was the worst of all.

As for "reverse grids" or "mixing up the order", it wouldn't work; Slower teams would just drop the wings and have slow cornering cars which turned into rocketships on the straights - remember the "Force India Trains"? Most of the overtaking would happen during pitstops, with faster cars pumping in better laptimes when in the clear to emerge ahead from the pitlane...

Formula 1 2017: General Discussion Thread

Comments