|
|
Post by Carl on Jun 26, 2024 17:14:11 GMT
I couldn't agree more, Carl. Strategic thinking by the driver used to be a very important factor in F1. That was what drivers like Jackie Stewart and Niki Lauda excelled in. Now it matters very little, if anything at all. Definitely Mikael. And don't forget Alain Prost who always built up his race and thought ahead. He won many races and championships with this approach. Much has been lost over the years. Everyone understands that you cannot stop advancing technology, especially in a technical sport like Formula 1. But, as I said recently, it is up to the FIA to protect the sport. And by the sport I mean the character of the sport. The Mission Control centers do not make racing better, often the opposite. And here the FIA should have intervened much earlier, just like with aerodynamics. René, I totally agree about Alain Prost. His genius would be neutered in today's F1. We all despair at the video game environment consuming motorsport, with engineers elated to be in control. The problem is that few, really only those who've raced, can comprehend the challenges. Technophiles don't understand anything remote from their motherboard. Despite his rally experience, Mohammed Ben Sulayem is worthless. A clean break is what's needed.
Cheers, Carl
|
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Jun 26, 2024 17:56:50 GMT
Oh yes indeed; Prost ("the Professor") should not be forgotten.
Yes, as I understand it, drivers like Lauda and Prost were probably not the fastest in terms of "raw", natural speed. But they could compensate for not being the absolute fastest by being the smartest/most "sly" (meant in a positive way).
This "extra dimension" (compared to how it is now) was what made F1 so "magic".
(Perhaps Stewart was not the best example to include in this discussion. Rather, he might have been unique in that he had it all: superb natural speed as well as a superb strategical mind (again as far as I understand ...).)
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Jun 26, 2024 18:37:11 GMT
Oh yes indeed; Prost ("the Professor") should not be forgotten.
Yes, as I understand it, drivers like Lauda and Prost were probably not the fastest in terms of "raw", natural speed. But they could compensate for not being the absolute fastest by being the smartest/most "sly" (meant in a positive way).
This "extra dimension" (compared to how it is now) was what made F1 so "magic".
(Perhaps Stewart was not the best example to include in this discussion. Rather, he might have been unique in that he had it all: superb natural speed as well as a superb strategical mind (again as far as I understand ...).)
Mikael, You're right about the importance of intelligence, and about Jackie Stewart. We can all name drivers whose great natural talents were hobbled by their intellect. Jackie Stewart had extraordinary natural talent and, after great difficulty early in life, a brilliant analytical mind. Unable to read as a child because of extreme dyslexia, he was compelled to develop other ways to learn. Necessity opened his mind. Cheers, Carl |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Jun 27, 2024 8:43:56 GMT
I had a thought, which is always potentially dangerous, that perhaps F1 is no longer catering to us older generation but more towards the younger set, who after all, provide more of a long term market than we do. They all love the electronics etc, and video gaming look alikes of the modern F1 car.
Also beauty is in the eye of the beholder and when I first got involved in following F1 I loved the current cars, 1969/70 much more than the cars even a few years younger, eg 1964. Cars that were 30 years old then eg Alfetta 159 didn't really appeal to me. The cars that we all like on this forum are 40 to 50 years old, the "modern" equivalents of a 1925 -30 Bentley.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Jun 27, 2024 16:16:40 GMT
I had a thought, which is always potentially dangerous, that perhaps F1 is no longer catering to us older generation but more towards the younger set, who after all, provide more of a long term market than we do. They all love the electronics etc, and video gaming look alikes of the modern F1 car. Also beauty is in the eye of the beholder and when I first got involved in following F1 I loved the current cars, 1969/70 much more than the cars even a few years younger, eg 1964. Cars that were 30 years old then eg Alfetta 159 didn't really appeal to me. The cars that we all like on this forum are 40 to 50 years old, the "modern" equivalents of a 1925 -30 Bentley. Well thought and well said, Rob |
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Jun 27, 2024 17:16:52 GMT
You're probably right, Rob; for the younger generation (those in their 20s now, say), the team-effort aspect, the radio communication, etc., is also a matter of course for them, as it has been like that throughout their lifetime.
I agree only partly, though. Many mechanical innovations were either "nipped in the bud", or were eliminated rather quickly. I'm thinking about such examples as more than four wheels (e.g., six wheels), which probably was more efficient; and the fan-principle of Brabham in 1978, which was extremely efficient.
On the other hand, electronics and information technology has enjoyed basically a "free ride" (I mean, unlimited, unrestricted evolution). I do believe that this is what has ... yes, ruined the sport!
To strengthen my point, although I'm not a close follower of MotoGP, I do think that a MotoGP race of 2024 is way more interesting to watch than one of, say, 1980. The tyre evolution has actually had a positive effect on that branch of motor sport. And in MotoGP, electronics and information technology has been held in check in a very good way.
Mechanical evolution that was banned: "dangerous" wings, six wheels and "machine-produced downforce":
I would like to add, also, that I don't think all evolution seen in, say, road cars is for the worse. As one example, I don't think a Porsche 911 has ever looked better than the present 2024-model. By each iteration, it becomes prettier than the previous one, generally. Also, of course, in terms of quality, performance, etc., it only gets better!
If, by some improbable miracle, a fairy would ask me to pick one of the two cars shown below (to keep and to use) - with the 1973 version in absolute mint condition, for sure I would choose the newest one!
1973 Porsche Carrera
2024 Porsche 911 GTS - on a completely different level!
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Jun 27, 2024 20:03:44 GMT
I had a thought, which is always potentially dangerous. Ha, ha, you make me laugh Rob!  But you're right. I think everyone has a soft spot for the cars and drivers from the period when you learned about the sport. At least that's certainly the case for me. If you became a Formula 1 fan during the Schumi/Ferrari years, then you are already a veteran enthusiast. And then you have indeed only known the sport with a lot of computer technology.. But as Mikael rightly said, strangely enough there has never been and still is no restriction on the use of computer technology. Underestimation, incompetence, ignorance? |
|
