Jump to content

The F1 Thread


die hard doonhamer

Recommended Posts

Well if we're talking about 'Hamilton' era then surely it begins in 2007, so post-Schumi. Although I can see why some people might suggest that he transcends two distinct era with the hybrid thing and how badly Vettel fell away at the same point.
I'd largely agree, but I am an old man.

I saw something last week that I found interesting - the last year which didn't see a win for either Lewis Hamilton or Michael Schumacher was 1991!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, virginton said:

TL;Dr version: More dramatic engine failures = a better sport.

Totally agree, and IMO the cost cap era has done absolutely nothing to enhance racing whatsoever. The backmarkers are still absolutely nowhere, only we're now seeing race after race where upwards of 15 cars finish. Races are often as much of a processional snoozefest as the sprint/refuel era was, only for different reasons. 

The idea that the leading form of motorsport on the planet, with teams entered and backed by some of the biggest automotive corporations on the planet needs to 'save money' is ridiculous. Ferrari proved that even back in the first decade of the 2000's it was perfectly possible for teams to go all-out and still field a completely bullet-proof car. What was it they had? One solitary mechanical failure DNF across two entire seasons?

The lack of a tyre war, the restrictions on in-season development and testing, and this nonsense of punting people to the back of the grid because of a part replacement but still somehow permitting them to participate in Q2 and Q3, all of it is ridiculous. By the look of things we could well see the Championship ruined in the final few races of this season by Leclerc having to take grid penalties. Now I accept that everyone knew the rules and regulations before entering, so it's entirely Ferrari's look out if they can't build a reliable engine, but the engine failures have already fucked Leclerc in at least two races this season and cost him heavily. Why should he be punished yet again for the same incident, especially when it may well ruin the title fight as a spectacle? Surely from the FIA's perspective that would be a colossally stupid act of self-harm. It's not as if Ferrari can only afford to build three engines per car every single season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I first started watching F1 in 1986 in the height of the turbo era, and part of the fun was that the cars were horrifically unreliable. Even if it was a dull race, there was always a distinct possibility that the leaders car would break down and things would get mixed up. You don't get that jeopardy now. Unless you're Ferrari

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I first started watching F1 in 1986 in the height of the turbo era, and part of the fun was that the cars were horrifically unreliable. Even if it was a dull race, there was always a distinct possibility that the leaders car would break down and things would get mixed up. You don't get that jeopardy now. Unless you're Ferrari
Yep, you could never be sure someone had the points in the bag until the race was over. Was always exciting to see somebody's chances disappear in a cloud of smoke and flames.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...