Grand Prix Rejects

yannicksamlad wrote:Full grids - there's room for 26 on the grid. Some people have never seen an F1 race with a full grid . More cars, more racing, more stories, a bigger cast of heroes ( and villains?) ...More fun

It's a bit mad to think that the 1995 Monaco Grand Prix was the last time F1 had a full grid. It's a bit bloody mad!

Rob Dylan wrote:It's a bit mad to think that the 1995 Monaco Grand Prix was the last time F1 had a full grid. It's a bit bloody mad!

I agree - it is mad that F1 is undersubscribed. The 'highest level' of motorsport has failed to attract a full complement of competitors. F1 should be oversubscribed with teams as well as drivers clamouring to get in. I can't think of another major sport with the same problem ( perhaps yachting, if that counts?).
I had hopes that Liberty would spot the advantages of a full grid in terms of boosting profile, enhancing F1's credibility, giving more drivers the opportunity, adding interest, increasing the amount of racing, adding to the drama etc..but it seems they've just gone for easier options.

Graphics using local language

I really miss seeing bumps on race tracks, because often it would unsettle the car meaning the driver had to work that bit harder. Not liking these billiard table smooth race tracks.

Yes - more bumps, perhaps even a little track break-up.

And if you do have to have safety cars ( And I still miss the days of races which were either stopped and restarted after a proper clean-up, or they just managed with yellows) ...
...then I miss non-standard safety cars ( although I understand why they 'need' a decent machine nowadays because of tyre characteristics) . They used to have some 'local choices'.

Unreliability.

dr-baker wrote:Unreliability.

I also liked it when you had paid drivers rocking up towards the end of the season to help out those teams that were struggling financially. The 1994 end of season races (Jerez, Suzuka & Oz) were classic examples of this.

ibsey wrote:

dr-baker wrote:Unreliability.

I also liked it when you had paid drivers rocking up towards the end of the season to help out those teams that were struggling financially. The 1994 end of season races (Jerez, Suzuka & Oz) were classic examples of this.

I still find it staggering that in 1994 of all season, Pacific was one of only four teams (alongside Arrows/Footwork, Tyrrell and Minardi) to have retained un unchanged driver line up for the entire season. They would have been the team most in need of sponsorship (they famously had a sponsorship deal fall through at the San Marino GP that year). But somehow, they still got sponsors on board!

Watching it.

The old bridge from Barcelona circuit.

Watching a race from 2011, and I do genuinely really miss the noise and the sheer number of cars on the grid. The cars look fine, the engines sound great. The racing then was about the same as it is now, so no change there. Some more unreliability would have been great back then, just as it would be now.

I thought I wouldn't miss the smaller, shorter cars, but seeing how difficult it is to overtake without DRS I think switching to a smaller package would fix this problem better than DRS could be. I know its not the only cause of the issue but I believe it would be a major step in solving the problem.

The old pitlane and garages in Monaco.

And the old Start/Finish line at Silverstone.

CoopsII wrote:The old pitlane and garages in Monaco.

I miss working in the so-called pitlane because it really did bring the teams close to the VIPs and whichever fortunate souls managed to get a Paddock Club pass but I don't miss having to haul stuff back and forth across the harbour.

As I write, I'm re-watching the 2011 British Grand Prix. Hamilton goes off on the beginning laps through the run-off area, and David Coulthard commentates that he did the same thing at that corner when it was gravel in 2008 when Hamilton dominated, and went out. Got me thinking: my biggest problem must be the ultra-reliability these days, and the lack of variety that brings. In every previous decade, Hamilton would have been out there and then, and all those mid-fielders would have been bumped up an extra place, for an extra few points, and an extra bit of spice for the championship. It would have made some difference, at least.

I looked at results and realized that Leclerc at Monaco is the only time this season that driver has retired due to single-car incident.

Bleu wrote:I looked at results and realized that Leclerc at Monaco is the only time this season that driver has retired due to single-car incident.

That's interesting ..and made me wonder a bit about driver's mistakes ending their own race. There were spins and off-track moments and crashes in France and Austria on Friday/Saturday , but in the races the drivers dont seem to catch themselves out ( or get caught out from a glitch) .
And that is something I miss from the 'old' days

And not to be a broken record, but since posting my last comment on Hamilton missing the corner at Silverstone, he actually missed it twice. Likewise, at the following race at the German Grand Prix of 2011, both Vettel and Schumacher hit a former gravel trap, but of course both continued without retiring.

Alone, that's three extra retirements in two races, simply due to the organisers making the race easier.


The rules have been changed over the years - new run-off areas; DRS - to make sure that the front-runners are always at the front, they are always reliable, and the sponsors are always happy.

Something that I've realised recently that's missing from older Formula One races is the diversity of winning teams. There hasn't been a team outside of Mercedes, Red Bull or Ferrari who's won a race since 2013. Meanwhile, in the 1970s or 1980s (the most obvious exception being 1988), you'd frequently get four or five winning teams per year and not always the front-runners either, with smaller teams like Hesketh, Shadow or Wolf getting in on the action.

From the old races i miss the 100% reject team and their fight for not finishing last, something we miss since the days Marussia and Caterham were both still there.

Same stuff as everyone, attrition, you never quite knew if your guy was going to make it to the end, could be a minute in the lead but one mistake and its in the gravel, or the engine could blow up. Now sometimes after lap 3 i'm like "well thats done" second hald of this year has been way better though.

But where is the skill if a mistake means you just floor the throttle and carry on? Also I've been watching some 98/99/01 races on youtube recently, those cars looks a handful and the sheer speed they carried. I remember thinking races were boring because so much overtaking was done in the pits but it was actually thrilling wondering when someone would pit and could they go quick enough to make it. Didnt realise how slow the cars look by comparison now.

RAK wrote:Something that I've realised recently that's missing from older Formula One races is the diversity of winning teams. There hasn't been a team outside of Mercedes, Red Bull or Ferrari who's won a race since 2013. Meanwhile, in the 1970s or 1980s (the most obvious exception being 1988), you'd frequently get four or five winning teams per year and not always the front-runners either, with smaller teams like Hesketh, Shadow or Wolf getting in on the action.

Agreed, more teams winning would be great. Without going too much back in time, 2012 or 2008 were quite great from this side.

Not just that but it seems easier for teams to dominate multiple years at a time now...since 2000:

Ferrari won CC 6 years in a row
Red Bull 4
Mercedes 6

Every team would steal a march for a year or 2 only to eventually be reigned in, the consistency now is maddening

Well, McLaren won four years in a row in late 80s/early 90s anyway...
And Williams won four drivers championship and five constructors out of six during the 90s, not consecutive, but impressive too.

I feel like the majority of Williams titles were at least competitive. 96 wasn't but a good fight between the 2, 97 Ferrari were right there. McLaren in the 80's seemed to be an anomaly, at any rate they were crashing into each other all the timne.Not the sheer tepidness of Hamilton vs Bottas and Vettel vs Webber.

To be fair 2010 vs 2012 weren't just Vettel vs Webber.

LadyMarussia295 wrote:To be fair 2010 vs 2012 weren't just Vettel vs Webber.

Maybe so, or maybe that's just the perspective of almost all the other years of this decade. 2010 Red Bull did score almost all the poles, and from memory were usually 1-2 on the grid. 2012 feels more like a genuinely competitive field rather than one gifted through the top teams making unforced errors. And honestly, in a year like 2016, it's a bloody miracle Hamilton and Rosberg punted each other off in Barcelona, because otherwise we would have had Mercedes winning 20 out of 21 races.

Since 2011 certainly it has felt like either a Vettel or a Hamilton benefit most of the time. Regardless of the possibility of someone beating them, it has almost felt inevitable that in their machinery they were never going to be beaten in hindsight. Even 2012, Red Bull got their act together and won four races in a row, and I just rolled my eyes. If Hamilton hadn't had mechanical failure in Malaysia 2016, he would have won that season as well.

I guess my disjointed rambling comes down to: we've really barely had much competition across the field outside of 2010 and 2012, and even that level of competitiveness seems to have come from miracles than from any kind of inherent quality in the system of F1 as we see it today. And I think that is what has turned a lot of people off from the sport.

Rob Dylan wrote:I guess my disjointed rambling comes down to: we've really barely had much competition across the field outside of 2010 and 2012, and even that level of competitiveness seems to have come from miracles than from any kind of inherent quality in the system of F1 as we see it today. And I think that is what has turned a lot of people off from the sport.

I agree - since 2010 we have missed the kind of real inter-team competition for the title that keeps the sport in people's minds, and I think we are also missing one big competitive order shake up. In 9 years since 2010, really its been pretty comfortable Red Bull and then a switch to comfortable Mercedes domination. Those Ferrari challenges didnt really amount to much ( I don't buy that they ever really made the best car of 2018).
In previous decades we did have Williams and McLaren and Ferrari dominance - but not really 2 teams tying up 9 years

Rob Dylan wrote:

LadyMarussia295 wrote:To be fair 2010 vs 2012 weren't just Vettel vs Webber.

Maybe so, or maybe that's just the perspective of almost all the other years of this decade. 2010 Red Bull did score almost all the poles, and from memory were usually 1-2 on the grid. 2012 feels more like a genuinely competitive field rather than one gifted through the top teams making unforced errors. And honestly, in a year like 2016, it's a bloody miracle Hamilton and Rosberg punted each other off in Barcelona, because otherwise we would have had Mercedes winning 20 out of 21 races.

Since 2011 certainly it has felt like either a Vettel or a Hamilton benefit most of the time. Regardless of the possibility of someone beating them, it has almost felt inevitable that in their machinery they were never going to be beaten in hindsight. Even 2012, Red Bull got their act together and won four races in a row, and I just rolled my eyes. If Hamilton hadn't had mechanical failure in Malaysia 2016, he would have won that season as well.

I guess my disjointed rambling comes down to: we've really barely had much competition across the field outside of 2010 and 2012, and even that level of competitiveness seems to have come from miracles than from any kind of inherent quality in the system of F1 as we see it today. And I think that is what has turned a lot of people off from the sport.

Red Bull were certainly dominant over a single lap in 2010, with 15 pole positions that season - ten for Vettel and five for Webber, with Webber's total alone more than the rest of the field put together (2 for Alonso, 1 for Hamilton and 1 for Hulkenberg).

They had eight front row lock outs that season too - perhaps unsurprisingly, the low number of poles for others meant none of their rivals had a single front row lock up. In fact, I believe the Italian GP was the only race that season where Red Bull didn't have at least one car on the front row that season (they were 4th and 6th).

yannicksamlad wrote:

Rob Dylan wrote:I guess my disjointed rambling comes down to: we've really barely had much competition across the field outside of 2010 and 2012, and even that level of competitiveness seems to have come from miracles than from any kind of inherent quality in the system of F1 as we see it today. And I think that is what has turned a lot of people off from the sport.

I agree - since 2010 we have missed the kind of real inter-team competition for the title that keeps the sport in people's minds, and I think we are also missing one big competitive order shake up. In 9 years since 2010, really its been pretty comfortable Red Bull and then a switch to comfortable Mercedes domination. Those Ferrari challenges didnt really amount to much ( I don't buy that they ever really made the best car of 2018).
In previous decades we did have Williams and McLaren and Ferrari dominance - but not really 2 teams tying up 9 years

I would say that, even if Ferrari had a car that was technically equal to Mercedes - and I'd say that, at least in the early part of the season in 2018, there's an argument for that - they weren't capable of exploiting that with their organisational structure.

It's not just been the car, but the fact that the team as a whole has been working in a much more cohesive manner than any of their rivals for a long time that has made Mercedes that dominant in recent years, and before that Red Bull managed to achieve that similar sense of cohesion.

In that sense, it is kind of hard to see which team can achieve that sense of organisational discipline and technical skill, except probably Red Bull. Ferrari, right now at least, have the challenge of managing a difficult driver pairing, McLaren have begun creeping back towards the front, but still have a significant gap to the front runners to make up and Renault have lost momentum and ended up losing ground - the remaining teams lack the resources to bridge the gap to the big teams.

I would certainly agree (I mean, it's basically a fact at this point) that Mercedes' advantage has been from their better organisation. But it is certainly frustrating that even when they HAD intra-team issues, they were almost teflon. I don't believe that Wolff and Lauda were particularly effective in controlling Hamilton and Rosberg c. 2014-2016, and in fact believe that better management would have put those guys in line and stopped them bumping into each other every few races. It's the fact that they have been so dominant in SPITE of that, that infuriates me.

Now we've had six consecutive seasons dominated by one team and driver, with only a miracle giving Rosberg a championship. It does honestly feel as if Mercedes have cracked the F1 code and simply won't be beaten again in a long time. I've been waiting for years now for a serious competitor, but don't see any change in the order of things any time soon.

I miss the variety, when you had the REAL engines, V8, V10, V12, those were engines worth the F1 badge, and on that line, I miss the different manufacturers, you had Car companies, specialist companies (Cosworth, Mugen, Judd, etc.) and even a motorbike company (Yamaha). The variety is gone, especially now that transmissions are becoming an increasingly outsourced, and electronics are becoming standardised.

I miss the days when people could actually SAY something without censure, now it's the same run through the PR system drivel where press releases are the same words from different people, and the "Cool down" room is the only place besides driver and team radio (which itself filtered beforehand) where you can get some authentic thoughts.

I miss the privateer teams as well, these days it's more about boards, shareholders, etc, than any real passionate individuals. Although in fairness, passionate individuals can't get very far in modern F1 (Super Aguri, anyone?) Car companies are and always have been in F1, but now there is very little commitment to the sport itself, as soon as the suits get bored, they pull the plug, Renault is one of the most guilty parties, and anyone remember how little interest Ford put in when they were running Jaguar in the early 00's?

Launches?! Every Launch is the same old story, a few pics on the net, or just "Oh look, here's our car, nice eh?" on the first day of testing. remember when an F1 launch was.... well.. "Formula One" it was an occasion, even for back of the grid teams.

Speaking of launches, what about Liveries? Particularly in the top 3, it's more or less the same thing year in and year out, Sure Ferraris will always be red, but come on.

Normally I hate hearkening for yesteryear, but where F1 is right now, it actually may have a point.

One shot qualifying. It was awesome to watch. Meant even the backmarkers got TV exposure and it allowed their drivers to showcase their talent. Occasionally a championship contender would mess it up and start way down or an underdog would pull off a miracle lap (see Webber at Malaysia 04) leading to mixed up grids. Of course there were times when it was wet/dry which heavily favoured some over others but to me that was just nature of the beast...and it also meant a Minardi once had provisional pole...so there is that.

Cars being pushed over the edge in terms of relibility and breaking down - I feel having drivers losing results due to car breakdowns really emphasised how much a team game F1 was.

Lewis Hamilton shared on Instagram a fascinating video on team strategy by F1TV showing the Merc strategists talking about how they were going to overthrow Max - and as he said , not nearly as much emphasis is on the teams as there probably should be.

Another minor shout would be a bit more agression - driving standards have improved immeasurably in the past 20 years and this current crop are too sensible to have stuff happen like this into Turn 1 , Lap 1. I might be wrong this afternoon mind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwYLWE2 ... 2k12jb2k12

This is topical. On the old TV footage at Monaco, as a car would exit the tunnel, the camera shot would zoom in across the harbour until it zeroed in on the car.

I guess, rather than trying to intentionally add excitement, in actuality said camera also covered a different part of the track and was required by the director to spin round and cover the tunnel too. Not so many cameras in those days. But it looked nice.

I know it's done for safety these days but I've been watching quite a few 80s/90s races recently and I really miss just letting the races continue if a car has pulled off with mechanical issues or spun off (I'm primarily referring to pulled completely off the track rather than stopped on track), rather than throwing a safety car, whether full or virtual, at literally everything. Creates too many random elements (Abu Dhabi last year being the prime example but there'll have been lots of others).

I mean think of Australia 86 for a prime example. If they'd have pulled a SC for Rosberg pulling off then Mansell would have pitted and been champion! (Or if they'd thrown it after Mansell's blowout, Piquet would have had more time to pit and been out ahead of Prost and he be champion). Essentially Prost's advantage from having newer tyres from stopping earlier in the race would have been neutralised.

James1978 wrote: ↑12 Sep 2022, 11:27
I mean think of Australia 86 for a prime example. If they'd have pulled a SC for Rosberg pulling off then Mansell would have pitted and been champion! (Or if they'd thrown it after Mansell's blowout, Piquet would have had more time to pit and been out ahead of Prost and he be champion). Essentially Prost's advantage from having newer tyres from stopping earlier in the race would have been neutralised.

Running through the what-ifs of Australia 86 if there was a safety car (or how about a red flag, standing restart and wing-crunching turn 1) shows up how safety cars are just random-event generators, which undo the whole point of a GP being a 300km race (and not a 100km race followed by a 200km race). I too miss races without safety cars. Surely a slow-enough VSC these days would allow some car recovery to be safe..

Not that I miss it but it is worth noting that seeing some old races the retired cars were often left on the spot.

Here is final few laps of the Portuguese GP 1993

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwR_kT2 ... =PeterLein

* Senna's car is inside turn 5.
* Prost onboard shows there's still recovery work done on Patrese's car on the final lap at turn 6 (Parabolica Interior)
* Katayama's car is between turns 7 (Orelha) and 8 (Tanque) on the right-hand side
* Suzuki's car is inside turn 9 (right-hand part of Esses).

I think majority of the 1986 Australian Grand Prix had car on the firing line at the left-right-chicane on the middle part of the circuit?

I remember watching Imola 1998 or 1999, the one where Häkkinen famously bumped it into the wall on the start straight. The reason I remember it is because of how shocked I was that the car remained there for the rest of the race, always on the TV screen when they would show that start-finish straight.

Rob Dylan wrote: ↑13 Sep 2022, 19:29 I remember watching Imola 1998 or 1999, the one where Häkkinen famously bumped it into the wall on the start straight. The reason I remember it is because of how shocked I was that the car remained there for the rest of the race, always on the TV screen when they would show that start-finish straight.

It's 1999 and one of my favourite Murray Walker commentaries "OFF OFF OFF!!!". Sounded like he'd been electrocuted

James1978 wrote: ↑14 Sep 2022, 19:43

Rob Dylan wrote: ↑13 Sep 2022, 19:29 I remember watching Imola 1998 or 1999, the one where Häkkinen famously bumped it into the wall on the start straight. The reason I remember it is because of how shocked I was that the car remained there for the rest of the race, always on the TV screen when they would show that start-finish straight.

It's 1999 and one of my favourite Murray Walker commentaries "OFF OFF OFF!!!". Sounded like he'd been electrocuted

Now there’s one thing I miss from old F1 races - Murray Walker. RIP.