> Sadly unless you normalize the cars we may never see true racing as you say.
For interesting single-make racing, you can watch the GP2 and GP3 races before/after the F1 race and qualifying (for European races, and a few others).
Traditionally, multi-make series have been called "Formula" series in racing lingo.
>On the other hand, absolutely unlimited performance - perhaps without a human driver - racecars would be pretty cool to watch.
I bet nobody will watch it, when I was watching F1 it was already boring and many rules were added to reduce speeds and make it easier to over take, otherwise the order they start will be the order they will finish.
> I really wish they would mandate a single engine and a singe car type.
Right now, it's the engine manufacturers (and the conglomerates behind them) that provide the biggest chunk of funding. If a single engine would be mandated, the funding would dry out.
And if you look back to pre-2014 naturally aspirated V8 engine era (which were quite closely matched), the engines were pretty closely matched but the racing was completely and utterly dominated by a single team (RBR) because of their superior aerodynamics (and exhaust blown diffusers, etc).
F1 is a multi manufacturer racing series and will remain to be one (that's what the name "Formula" stands for). If you take away the competition between the manufacturers, it would quickly cause the whole series to dry out.
There are plenty of good single manufacturer racing series out there (GP2, GP3, Formula Renault, etc). As much as I enjoy watching those, what brings me to F1 is knowing that every car on the grid is different from each other as well as different from what it was two weeks ago.
> Wouldn't Formula 1 be more interesting if everyone had to race with the same car?
It would be a different sport. Not necessarily worse or better, just different. The engineering constrains and challenges are, et this moment, part of the point.
Formula E is closer to what you’re talking about, i believe only the power train is customisable.
>So how about we make the cars fun to watch again?
F1 can be very boring, the guys that were starting first were finishing first,
I would watch it to see overtakes and piloting skills and the problem is that without limits the company with the big money will win. This is not fun, it does not make money and rules change to limit costs so all the teams can compete using a similar budget.
I stopped watching 2 decades ago, I stopped also watching or reading the summaries, it got to boring for me but I suppose that there are soem that want to see that kind of sport where the teams have no limit and you just watch the cars running around in circles and admire them.
I think there are only a few engines providers anyway , so I am not sure on what they are optimizing on this days, maybe aerodynamics and fuel strategy.
"we see less and less 'real racing' which is a shame." - I've given up on F1 for that very reason but haven't missed it since I started watching MotoGP (F1 of motorbikes). New season has just started.
> Wouldn't Formula 1 be more interesting if everyone had to race with the same car?
This already exists. Formula 2 is essentially Formula 1 racing, but everyone races the same car with the same specs. IndyCar is another example of Formula style racing where everyone races the same vehicle.
But Formula 1 is fascinating because it pushes the technological envelope of what is possible. The engineers back at car-manufacturer headquarters are the athletes participating on the team. The main driver of course is important, but there are plenty of examples of amazing drivers in less desirable cars that lose repeatedly. Because the engineering is part of the sport. Formula 1 drivers have quit teams over engineering decisions. Formula 1 is so interesting because the cars just keep pushing the engineering envelope of what is possible with 4 wheels.
This is similar to the old Ford vs Ferrari days at Le Mans, where car manufacturers had to build cars that were capable of racing at high speeds for 24 hours straight. Of course the driver is important. But more important than the driver is the car. The car must be able to last, and especially back in the 60s, cars really couldn't do that.
Much of the technology that is developed at those races trickled down into what we drive today and have built more reliable cars. Technology like fuel injection that we take for granted in cars today came from these races.
Sadly unless you normalize the cars we may never see true racing as you say. Someone in my F1 watch group pointed out the minimal passes in that race. It would be sad if it ends up being like the Peak Schumacher days where races were more or less won by pit strategy.
Also worried that it's now Ferrari, Mercedes, and everyone else. By a long shot.
> not a tech demo where vastly different constructions would compete for speed
I have to say, I'm not that interested in F1 but if there was a F1-like competition where there is no regulation and it's all about technological innovation, I would watch that.
And were illegal not too long ago, remember the Fernando is faster than you[0] scandal? Yeah, that was about the time I think I just couldn't be bothered with F1 anymore and just watched WRC instead. Honestly, F1 has always been a huge advertisement, but things like this is what makes it a mockery.
MotoGP also has team orders but the racing really is way better; I used to dislike it, but the racing has been so close and it's just a uch better spectacle without all the nonsensical pretense and pageantry that F1 has become bloated with.
Agreed! I omitted this in my original comment, but that's exactly what I did many years ago :-)
For some years I would watch both, but then I just got bored of F1 and only kept watched 2 wheels. Now I don't have so much spare time and when I do I prefer to invest it I other things, but once in a while is always funny to watch a 2 wheels race (motogp, superbike or anything really)
If ever there were a statement more universally applicable, I've not encountered it. :)
Racing is, of course, about finishing the race (or maybe the season) first (along with all of additional considerations that implies), not just lapping fast.
> F-1 has always baffled me as a sport. Not that it's inherently bad or boring, just that there are so many motor sports that make it look that way. Same with NASCAR. I don't understand how an audience for those exists when, for example, rally races exist.
I expect the answer to that involves how well (or how poorly) rallying is televised.
> So how about we make the cars fun to watch again?
Since you mentioned you are too young to even have watched the refueling era of F1, you need to understand: F1 could always be boring to watch.
During Schumacher's era you'd see P1 and P2 lapping over P4 or even P3 sometimes. Reliability was a mess, engines exploding, some races had barely 8-10 cars finishing; richest teams could run 3-5 engines in a single weekend while the non-competitive teams couldn't simply because they didn't have the budget.
The races now are much more competitive, even though RBR has been dominating, and previously Mercedes, the difference in lap time nowadays is much more competitive and entertaining to watch the midfield than it ever was in the 90s/2000s.
> Can't just take the car out to the track and run it between races when you want.
Yes, this has completely ruined the sport. My life used to revolved around F1 starting from the late 80s (did not miss a single race in 25 years), but two years ago I gave up and have not watched the past two seasons.
With rules preventing engine and car development once Mercedes locked in the advantage, it's game over. Sure F1 has had plenty of dominant teams for short time windows but it was engineering-driven and could (and was) overcome by better engineering by other teams. Now that the advantage is locked in by the rules, there is no hope.
To me there's no entertainment value whatsoever in watching Mercedes lap a second faster than everyone year after year. Let's watch some paint dry instead.
There are more racing leagues in the world besides F1. I personally enjoy SCCA, rally, and off road more than anything.
> Now imagine the equivalent of the US basketball or football system, where hundreds of thousands of kids start the sport young and are gradually filtered out all the way up to college and then pro leagues, ensuring the absolute best of the best are ultimately selected.
The barriers to these sports are becoming higher and higher, just like there are high barrier costs associated with karting/racing.
> The only thing though... with this insane technology, we see less and less 'real racing' which is a shame.
Completely agree! I was a die hard fan back in the days of Schumacher and my interest went downhill soon after they started introducing what I call 'artificial' racing concepts like DRS (Drag Reduction System) that heavily favored major constructors, who have unlimited engineering budget. Although, an antithesis is the refueling ban during the race. I think fueling strategies were a major contributor in making F1 entertaining. These days it's just.. boring for me. And the odd times to watch in the US doesn't help too.
For interesting single-make racing, you can watch the GP2 and GP3 races before/after the F1 race and qualifying (for European races, and a few others).
Traditionally, multi-make series have been called "Formula" series in racing lingo.
reply