THE F1 COVID THREAD: Will GP be cancelled?

[S griffin]

We needed it at the BTCC finale in 2001, it go so bad we left after the first touring car race and followed the second race on the internet. How times change

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by Casper

This is indicative of how some governments are thinking and more of the same could prevent F1 returning to a normal format any time soon. If more governments did a similar thing it would make any return in the near future very difficult indeed.

https://www.traveller.com.au/coronav...-a-year-h1ni8d

Utter insanity. Any science to back any of these extreme measures up?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ms_142989.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tec...n-germany/amp/

Edited to add links. Could provide others, depending on what sources people believe to be credible. Second link indicates death rate of .37%. Common flu is .1%. Do we shut down global economy for flu? Should we for .37%?

[Moneyseeker]

Update on the BGP, reports that Stuart Pringle says Silverstone needs to go back the UK government with their plans for holding the race within the next 10 days, he says ultimately it is the government's decision if they can go ahead or not.

I suspect we will hear this from more countries yet.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

Utter insanity. Any science to back any of these extreme measures up?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ms_142989.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tec...n-germany/amp/

Edited to add links. Could provide others, depending on what sources people believe to be credible. Second link indicates death rate of .37%. Common flu is .1%. Do we shut down global economy for flu? Should we for .37%?

Your right. It is utter insanity... to arrive at any concrete conclusions with incomplete data, which is the current situation. The info in the links above may or may not be correct. Even the first article calls this out. Much of US is using testing that when evaluated is showing questionable accuracy (false positives and negatives). In short, we really don't know.

In the end, we will not know the actual numbers until this is over. At which time everyone will armchair quarterback with full 20/20 hindsight. That has already started and it will only get worse. So far I think most decisions have been data driven using the "data available at that time". There is clearly cases of both over and under reacting then, now and in the future.

I was thinking last night of an analogy. There is a tornado warning. Everyone gets into their shelters. Tornado passes and destroys some property, but no loss of life. Conclusion for many? No casualties, so Tornadoes are completely overrated! Why am I hiding in shelters! Didn't kill me, my family or my friends! What various countries are doing now is going to keep the impact in deaths lower. But it will also sadly be used as evidence for a broad over-reaction.

The prudent action is to continue to act cautiously and follow the best data available to you at the moment.

Richard

[Richard C]

While I am ranting.

I think the largest (and ongoing) disservice to the public is how statistical models are being presented. I think the fault here lies firstly with the general public's lack of understanding of how statistics works which then leads into a related issue is that both the scientific community and especially the media does a bad job of how they "communicate" the output of statistical modeling. It nearly always allows for a high level of incorrect conclusions being drawn.

So I am stealing a non Pandemic diagram to make my point.



That type of diagram should be somewhat familiar to people (in that you have seen something like that before even if you don't know what it is or how it is generated). Nearly everyone will hone in and and look at the center dark line. They both ignore and don't know what the shaded part is. Which indicates the level of uncertainty in the output of the model. Additionally many diagrams (including this one) don't list what that is and what level of uncertainty it is showing (I am not a statistician, but a related item is "margin of error" for polls). Then, when the "truth" doesn't exactly fit to the black line, people say the model is crap. However, hopefully the truth fit somewhere within the shaded area (model wasn't crap). Oh, and lastly, if you see a diagram this with a high level of uncertainty, then you should realize that the accuracy of the model is not very high. Not that it is worthless, but it has limitations.

Sorry for my off topic rant.

Richard

[bathurst77]

Lets talk cost cutting and spending caps

What really gets to me is I could be in Lulu's Merc this year.
I would only want half his money, and i guarantee I would have matched his results podiums, points, poles so far this year.

Talk about waste!

[broadrun96]

Except you wouldn't. There's been zero offered results so everyone with a SuperLicense would have the same but those without would have nothing. Not zero but nothing, as in illegible for qualification.

[smithhehehaha]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

While I am ranting.

I think the largest (and ongoing) disservice to the public is how statistical models are being presented. I think the fault here lies firstly with the general public's lack of understanding of how statistics works which then leads into a related issue is that both the scientific community and especially the media does a bad job of how they "communicate" the output of statistical modeling. It nearly always allows for a high level of incorrect conclusions being drawn.

So I am stealing a non Pandemic diagram to make my point.



That type of diagram should be somewhat familiar to people (in that you have seen something like that before even if you don't know what it is or how it is generated). Nearly everyone will hone in and and look at the center dark line. They both ignore and don't know what the shaded part is. Which indicates the level of uncertainty in the output of the model. Additionally many diagrams (including this one) don't list what that is and what level of uncertainty it is showing (I am not a statistician, but a related item is "margin of error" for polls). Then, when the "truth" doesn't exactly fit to the black line, people say the model is crap. However, hopefully the truth fit somewhere within the shaded area (model wasn't crap). Oh, and lastly, if you see a diagram this with a high level of uncertainty, then you should realize that the accuracy of the model is not very high. Not that it is worthless, but it has limitations.

Sorry for my off topic rant.

Richard

Some recent researches about Covid-19 founded that this virus is still strong with temperature above 30 degrees Celsius, as there are many cases in tropical regions. Not really sure if the trend can ease by Summer.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

Utter insanity. Any science to back any of these extreme measures up?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ms_142989.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tec...n-germany/amp/

Edited to add links. Could provide others, depending on what sources people believe to be credible. Second link indicates death rate of .37%. Common flu is .1%. Do we shut down global economy for flu? Should we for .37%?

Don't ask me for any arguments ask the government who is putting the bans in place and get back to us with the answers.

[midgetman]

FFS. Have you not seen the film of Italy, of Spain, of New York and even here in the UK? Of over-run hospitals, of fleets of ambulances, of ever higher numbers of extra deaths?

The fact is, no matter *how* the numbers are spun, more people are now dead than would normally be so at this moment in time. Including many "fit and healthy" people. Behind every spun number are families, friends, businesses and social networks of individuals.

So let's take time to get this right. We'll find a new business model. But TBH motor racing, sport and tourism aren't that important right now.


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by midgetman

FFS. Have you not seen the film of Italy, of Spain, of New York and even here in the UK? Of over-run hospitals, of fleets of ambulances, of ever higher numbers of extra deaths?

The fact is, no matter *how* the numbers are spun, more people are now dead than would normally be so at this moment in time. Including many "fit and healthy" people. Behind every spun number are families, friends, businesses and social networks of individuals.

Agreed. Without any spin, or armchair assessments of how bad the disease may or not be, the following statement is currently the situation in England and Wales:

'Deaths in England and Wales have nearly doubled above what would be expected, hitting a 20-year high.'

[S griffin]

Agag boss of Formula E, says racing should come back ASAP, even if it's behind closed doors, so more people would have reason to stay in and watch sport, thus seeing less people break the lockdowns

[midgetman]

Well he would wouldn't he?

Teams, TV staff and drivers flocking in from all over the world, there must be well over 1000 people on site. And who's going to be the PM that welcomes those? Look at the Facebook Stasi who criticise others for travelling to visit aged parents.

It won't happen.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by smithhehehaha

Some recent researches about Covid-19 founded that this virus is still strong with temperature above 30 degrees Celsius, as there are many cases in tropical regions. Not really sure if the trend can ease by Summer.

Talk about proving my point!

Richard

[S griffin]

It was said to be a myth that the hot summer would kill the virus a little while ago

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It was said to be a myth that the hot summer would kill the virus a little while ago

So to explain my consternation. My post above says the chart is an example and is not related to Coronavirus. That what I am trying to illustrate is poor communication of statistics. So I show a chart with misleading info, very little in the way of legends (chart could be measuring car thefts, or who knows what!) and comment on how people use information like this incorrectly (and identify the cart as an example of "bad"). Then everyone starts using that info in this thread!

Plot twist. Chart really is for Coronavirus. But the point stands. Short of doing a reverse Google image search, can anyone really say what that chart is about, where it came from and what the confidence bands are?

With that being said, I think the impact of temperature is a fine topic and how it may related to the F1/racing season. But it is speculation without lots of data. Just like it now seems more data is saying chloroquine does not help and may make things worse. But that doesn't stop "sample of one" anecdotal evidence.

Richard

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It was said to be a myth that the hot summer would kill the virus a little while ago

A hot summer is a myth in the UK.

[S griffin]

It’s hot enough where I am

[bella]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Agag boss of Formula E, says racing should come back ASAP, even if it's behind closed doors, so more people would have reason to stay in and watch sport, thus seeing less people break the lockdowns

hard to disagree with the principle, if the safety of everybody involved can be guaranteed. it's commonly said that sport is a great morale booster and very good at bringing people together. the key is whether it can be done safely.

we can all sit here and get angry at... whatever we're all angry about. you can be pessimistic if you want, you can be optimistic. it's really up to you. i prefer to be an optimist because frankly, being stuck at home is hard enough as it is, i need to look for ways out and ways to make things happen *whilst staying safe*.

those of us who work trackside know whether some form of social distancing and increased hand washing is achievable in our own environments. we'll know how many of our colleagues are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members, and we'll know how many won't want to take unnecessary risks.

[S griffin]

I know how you feel Bella. I myself am trying to remain positive, as it’s hard enough being stuck here, when I could(should) be out there doing things if it weren’t for this pandemic. I just hope I can go back to doing the things I usually do when this is over and get further with my life.

Certainly the lack of sport is making it harder for us. We’ll have to wait and see when it is safer for sporting events to start running again

[chillibowl]

where would FE race though?

on one hand city streets are empty so minimal traffic disruptions. on the other hand, i cant imagine any city sanctioning that event, allocating city employees for its setup and supervision, and placing one of their city's hospitals and trauma units on standby during the race schedule.

they need to have a hospital nearby to race. anything that disrupts a potential injured driver from getting to that hospital and/or that hospital's inability to prioritize a race injury equals a canceled race right?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i cant imagine any city sanctioning that event, allocating city employees for its setup and supervision, and placing one of their city's hospitals and trauma units on standby during the race schedule.

While you are asking about intra city street circuit events, I think that brings up a great topic as to what exactly GP events are typically asking of the local infrastructure. Even with a zero spectator event, there will be some "ask" for local resources.

So for example, if you are expecting some level of EMT support trackside. That is pulling resources (who may already be overworked) away from supporting the general populous. My guess is that anyone who is not directly associated with the sport will NOT commit to support until things are stable locally. Then once they are OK, there will be some delay (likely weeks if not months) between everyone agreeing to "go" and the event taking place. I expect the number of associated things to be lined up in advance is larger than many think.

Related to this, the less you need to organize, the more likely you can get an event setup. So events at circuits that have not recently hosted a F1 event (be it a race or testing) is extremely unlikely in my opinion. Or if that happens, it will require much more lead-time. In short, I think anything but minor circuit adaptation is out of the question.

Richard

[ScotsBrutesFan]

I posted this last week when talking about F1 behind closed doors, but it's equally relevant to any major motorsport event.

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

The though strikes me that even behind closed doors, you'd still be looking at a cast hundreds, many be a thousand plus, to put on an event.

For the teams, FOM personnel - including the FOM TV crew, even at minimal levels, there would need to still be catering and other on site ancillaries.

Add to that the volunteer Marshals who would need to travel and have "safe" accommodation. The medical teams both on site and at the designated supporting hospital should the worst happen.

Back at the team bases they would have their "mission control" rooms fully staffed, perhaps overstaffed, given fewer at the circuit itself.

Whilst I can certainly see the appeal of saying run behind closed doors, is it even practical, .... and I've not even mentioned actually getting the teams factory prepped and then the travel aspect to where ever they might actually put on such events.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

they need to have a hospital nearby to race. anything that disrupts a potential injured driver from getting to that hospital and/or that hospital's inability to prioritize a race injury equals a canceled race right?

Wasn't there a Smog/Fog issue that effected an F1 event, that meant the Medical Helicopter whilst able to fly at the venue, the designated hospital's landing pad was below safe operating so the events at the circuit had to stop?

[bella]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I know how you feel Bella. I myself am trying to remain positive, as it’s hard enough being stuck here, when I could(should) be out there doing things if it weren’t for this pandemic. I just hope I can go back to doing the things I usually do when this is over and get further with my life.

Certainly the lack of sport is making it harder for us. We’ll have to wait and see when it is safer for sporting events to start running again

i just don't see the point in dwelling on the negative lifestyle aspects of this, you know? we ALL know things have to wait until it's safe to do so, that genuinely goes without saying in every discussion about racing resuming on tenths. and likewise, we all know and understand the horrendous effects this is having on those who are affected and their families. but we do need to look forward - this is where the money and opportunities will be. not in bending rules and pushing healthy boundaries but in reshaping the existing world to suit the new one.

as such i strongly believe that in the uk, spectating at motor racing events will be out of the question for a lot longer than motor racing events themselves will be.