nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Formula 1 2021 - General Discussion Thread (Read 1st post rules)

Cork Trucker

This is the official Formula 1 2021 - General Discussion Thread

Any posts that should be in the race weekend threads that are posted in here will get deleted without warning

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

quokula

RIP Max. Whatever you might say about his private life and upbringing, he was undoubtedly a steady hand at the FIA and the sport was much stronger under his stewardship. Always chose what was right over what was popular, and wasn't afraid to upset powerful teams for the good of the sport, unlike the FIA of today.

muckwarrior

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

HIs dad was interred during the war because his dad (Oswald Mosely) was pro-Nazi. He was probably hoping the Nazi's won the war and he was in with a shout of being appointed the Nazi leader (or high position) in England. Left Britain after the war instead of getting back into politics and came to live in Ireland in the 50s

He was also a baddie in Peaky Blinders.

El_Duderino 09

afatbollix wrote: »

I read his autobiography in lockdown. He has a connection to Ireland as he lived here for a bit.

Did a lot for road safety with NCAP.

And these days for fighting the press.

HIs dad was interred during the war because his dad (Oswald Mosely) was pro-Nazi. He was probably hoping the Nazi's won the war and he was in with a shout of being appointed the Nazi leader (or high position) in England. Left Britain after the war instead of getting back into politics and came to live in Ireland in the 50s

Joeface

that is savage destruction .

afatbollix

I read his autobiography in lockdown. He has a connection to Ireland as he lived here for a bit.

Did a lot for road safety with NCAP.

And these days for fighting the press.

El_Duderino 09

duploelabs wrote: »

Offset by what occoured in his dungeon

How many hoors a man wants at a time and how he wants them to role-play, is between the man and his wife and the hoors.

duploelabs

Jordan 199 wrote: »

He helped make the sport safer.

Offset by what occoured in his dungeon

Jordan 199

He helped make the sport safer.

El_Duderino 09

TCP/IP wrote: »

RIP Max, he really shaped F1 into what it is today alongside Bernie.

To say he had a colourful past would be putting it mildly (and charitably). But he certainly did a lot of good in F1.

TCP/IP

RIP Max, he really shaped F1 into what it is today alongside Bernie.

Harika

Max Mosley died, someone who shaped formula one to what it is today. He will be missed

[Deleted User]

https://imgur.com/gallery/O4b4LAq

Surprised I hadn't seen this before. Very nice.

bennyx_o

Captain_Crash wrote: »

Id say there is less chance of an outsider down the grid car winning in Monaco, sky had a stat yesterday during FP3 that something like in 53 of the last 67 races, the winner has come from the front row!

It's the hope that kills you!

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The punishment for mistakes is an interesting point. I'd be fine if they made runoffs damaging to tyres so they shorten their life or make a pitstop necessary. I bet the same fans would oppose those changes for the same reasons they oppose changing Monaco - because its not what they're used to.

We got a taste of it in grrmany 2019 when that drag strip had no traction in the wet and they just slid on it. Likewise, if they want to stop them exceeding track limits. Make a genuine penalty. They can't exceed track limits in Monaco because the limit is a wall. If the track was bordered by a couple of meters of slippy surface and then gravel or tarmac, they wouldn't exceed track limits as it wouldn't be worth it.

But any thing like that represents change and change = bad in f1 these days.

Maybe I'm old school, but I prefer the days of gravel traps than large run off areas. Yeah, it's not nice if you make a mistake and get stuck in it, but, it makes things more interesting and keeps the drivers on their toes. There'd be likely less issue with track limits too if there was a risk of ending up in the gravel.

As you said, though, it'll never happen these days. They need to come up with something that makes these large run off areas less appealing to drivers

flazio

You'd swear Monaco was blocking some other epic race like Malaysia or Turkey from being permanently on the calendar the way some nay sayers are passionate about dropping the race. Trust me, they still wouldn't return even if the Monaco slot opened up.

duploelabs

Those who think that it's only exciting when the cars go fast are usually the ones who find monaco boring and don't appreciate the skill inherent in getting around there in the shortest time

barryribs

Captain_Crash wrote: »

Id say there is less chance of an outsider down the grid car winning in Monaco, sky had a stat yesterday during FP3 that something like in 53 of the last 67 races, the winner has come from the front row!

Winners from the front row
Austin 100%
Abu Dabi 92%
Barcelona 90%
Istanbul 88%
Suzuka 84%
Interlagos 78%
Paul Ricard 75%
Baku 75%
A1 Ring 73%
Nurburgring 71%
China 69%
Hungaroring 69%
Monaco 68%
Sakhir 67%
Singapore 67%
Silverstone 65%
Montreal 65%
Spa 64%
Melb 63%
Imola 62%
Monza 53%

muckwarrior

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If a friend asked you for a recommendation to get in to F1, would you honestly recommend Monaco?

If I wanted to show someone how skilled F1 drivers are, or give them an impression of just how fast they go, I'd show them onboard footage from Monaco. Even after a quarter century of watching F1, I was in awe yesterday watching some of the footage. It was almost as if it was being played at double speed.

Sure, there are rarely overtakes in the race, but the same could be said for other tracks. At least in Monaco there are other aspects that make it appealing.

tigerboon

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The punishment for mistakes is an interesting point. I'd be fine if they made runoffs damaging to tyres so they shorten their life or make a pitstop necessary. I bet the same fans would oppose those changes for the same reasons they oppose changing Monaco - because its not what they're used to.

We got a taste of it in grrmany 2019 when that drag strip had no traction in the wet and they just slid on it. Likewise, if they want to stop them exceeding track limits. Make a genuine penalty. They can't exceed track limits in Monaco because the limit is a wall. If the track was bordered by a couple of meters of slippy surface and then gravel or tarmac, they wouldn't exceed track limits as it wouldn't be worth it.

But any thing like that represents change and change = bad in f1 these days.

To me the solution is a lot easier. It's just something like the radio fence that keeps the dog from going outside the garden boundary. You put a sensor in the middle of the car that triggers say a 5% power loss for a given time (enough to incur a real penalty). The cable is placed around the track just marginally more than half the car width from the track limits line. 5% loss wouldn't result in sudden deceleration or abnormal low speed so would be safe and given the money involved in F1, is relatively cheap. They already can pin point a cars relative position for DRS

Car99

I cancelled sky sports , I dont want to pay now TV €10 for a 24hr pass or the hassle of VPN to get the F1 official stream. Any other way to stream the race today even if commentary is in another language?

the_pen_turner

i like how close monaco is. it is a real challange and the in car footage is insane .
but its as boring as it could be most of the time.
its all well and good having heritage and nostalaga about monaco but the racing is dire
el duderino 09 is right. it can only turn off fans from the sport.

i dont see why they cannot find a few overtaking oertunities in the areas around the current circuit. surely they could add a few bits from the streets around there and make the race worth watching.

El_Duderino 09

bennyx_o wrote: »

The charm (If you can call it that) of Monaco for me is how close the walls are - the drivers have to be on their game for the whole lap, there's no limping back to the pits for a new front wing or tyre if you make a mistake, chances are it's session or race over much like Le Clerc in Qualifying yesterday or Schumacher in FP3.

Yes the race is generally a procession which is boring, but, with a much higher chance of incidents and retirements, it lends to a higher chance of an outsider winning the race - always nice to cheer the underdog on too!

The punishment for mistakes is an interesting point. I'd be fine if they made runoffs damaging to tyres so they shorten their life or make a pitstop necessary. I bet the same fans would oppose those changes for the same reasons they oppose changing Monaco - because its not what they're used to.

We got a taste of it in grrmany 2019 when that drag strip had no traction in the wet and they just slid on it. Likewise, if they want to stop them exceeding track limits. Make a genuine penalty. They can't exceed track limits in Monaco because the limit is a wall. If the track was bordered by a couple of meters of slippy surface and then gravel or tarmac, they wouldn't exceed track limits as it wouldn't be worth it.

But any thing like that represents change and change = bad in f1 these days.

El_Duderino 09

barryribs wrote: »

If you were making the decisions would you get rid of it off the calendar and if so, what would you replace it with?

I'm all set for another track in a third world country, built by migrant (read slave) workers, with acres of run of run off and 140 meaningless DRS passes per race. These are supposed to be the best drivers in the world, there should be consequences for running wide

Yeah, I said all that. Spot on.

In reality, I'd be happy to drop it. Can anyone honestly say they missed it last year?

Captain_Crash

bennyx_o wrote: »

it lends to a higher chance of an outsider winning the race - always nice to cheer the underdog on too!

Id say there is less chance of an outsider down the grid car winning in Monaco, sky had a stat yesterday during FP3 that something like in 53 of the last 67 races, the winner has come from the front row!

bennyx_o

barryribs wrote: »

I'm all set for another track in a third world country, built by migrant (read slave) workers, with acres of run of run off and 140 meaningless DRS passes per race. These are supposed to be the best drivers in the world, there should be consequences for running wide

The charm (If you can call it that) of Monaco for me is how close the walls are - the drivers have to be on their game for the whole lap, there's no limping back to the pits for a new front wing or tyre if you make a mistake, chances are it's session or race over much like Le Clerc in Qualifying yesterday or Schumacher in FP3.

Yes the race is generally a procession which is boring, but, with a much higher chance of incidents and retirements, it lends to a higher chance of an outsider winning the race - always nice to cheer the underdog on too!

barryribs

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah here. It's on the circuit because it's always been on the circuit, not merit. There's absolutely no way anyone would make an argument for a track like Monaco if it wasn't on the circuit for ages.

Making arguments for Monaco as if it's there on merit is self-delusion. Surely everyone knows it's only there because of it's history and in spite of how terrible it is. It's unsuitable, it's a terrible track, the only thing it has going for it is that it's old. It shows the way F1 wants to die. It should be about innovation and building the future, not being tethered to the past.

If you were making the decisions would you get rid of it off the calendar and if so, what would you replace it with?

I'm all set for another track in a third world country, built by migrant (read slave) workers, with acres of run of run off and 140 meaningless DRS passes per race. These are supposed to be the best drivers in the world, there should be consequences for running wide

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Monaco is at least visually interesting. That's the best we can hope for in 90% of races as it is.
If a first-timer watched a race on one of the nice apron tracks they're mostly boring or if they look nice it's a building that doesn't look great the 20th time it's shown. And even in a lot of "good" races someone who doesn't pay attention is only going to see a DRS pass. Might be interesting the first time but then it's gonna be "Hmm, that seems a bit easy".

If a friend asked you for a recommendation to get in to F1, would you honestly recommend Monaco?

El_Duderino 09

barryribs wrote: »

You can't compare the two. Monaco is a great track and one that offers the most challenge to the drivers. The only run off is at St. Devote, on the right hander before the hairpin and the chicane. Add into this the bumpy surface, the walls inches from the car and it is one where the drivers can truly make a difference. The blast up the hill to the blind massenet is fantastic, as is the swimming pool complex. The reason it holds the prestige it does is because it is such a difficult track.

Does it always make exciting races? Absolutely not. But that doesn't mean that its not difficult to drive a car at 150 mph inches from the wall for 78 laps. The spectacle of that alone means it will always deserve a place on the calendar.

Ah here. It's on the circuit because it's always been on the circuit, not merit. There's absolutely no way anyone would make an argument for a track like Monaco if it wasn't on the circuit for ages.

Making arguments for Monaco as if it's there on merit is self-delusion. Surely everyone knows it's only there because of it's history and in spite of how terrible it is. It's unsuitable, it's a terrible track, the only thing it has going for it is that it's old. It shows the way F1 wants to die. It should be about innovation and building the future, not being tethered to the past.

El_Duderino 09

Car99 wrote: »

200, 000 attend race weekend in Monaco which for a city with a population of less than 40k is a massive influx.

200,000 attending and 100,000,000 being bored into submission watching on TV. So a ratio of about 500 people bored to one having a good time at the race. Nobody can claim that's a good ratio and surely nobody would say it's an argument for Monaco being a good race, would they? Like, we're down to saying it's good if you go to the race - isn't that the very, very minimum you should be able to say about a race?

[Deleted User]

Monaco is at least visually interesting. That's the best we can hope for in 90% of races as it is.
If a first-timer watched a race on one of the nice apron tracks they're mostly boring or if they look nice it's a building that doesn't look great the 20th time it's shown. And even in a lot of "good" races someone who doesn't pay attention is only going to see a DRS pass. Might be interesting the first time but then it's gonna be "Hmm, that seems a bit easy".

barryribs

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lads, anyone who argues for Monaco can never complain about Paul Ricard being boring.

You can't compare the two. Monaco is a great track and one that offers the most challenge to the drivers. The only run off is at St. Devote, on the right hander before the hairpin and the chicane. Add into this the bumpy surface, the walls inches from the car and it is one where the drivers can truly make a difference. The blast up the hill to the blind massenet is fantastic, as is the swimming pool complex. The reason it holds the prestige it does is because it is such a difficult track.

Does it always make exciting races? Absolutely not. But that doesn't mean that its not difficult to drive a car at 150 mph inches from the wall for 78 laps. The spectacle of that alone means it will always deserve a place on the calendar.