[Official] Rate the Grand Prix: Singapore Grand Prix 2018

[52Paddy]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Expecting "the world's most sophisticated motors is what drives me to the armchair" to be close is shear folly unless you restrict that sophistication out of them to put on a show for you. It's already bad enough that one in pursuit is allowed, simply put, to open his wing, and the pursued may not. May as well go watch some more fiction in a theatre, no?

F1 is "considered" and "marketed" (rightly or wrongly, that's your view) as the pinnacle of motorsport. It is where you'll find the cutting edge in terms of motor car technology and, supposedly, the cream of the crop in terms of drivers (although with pay-drivers and manufacturer-contracted this is always diluted...not a new thing either of course). I have followed F1 since 2001 and have had the privilege of seeing drivers of excellent calibre go head-to-head, sometimes for the championship (thinking 2003, 2007, 2008 and 2012 as stand-outs). I don't think the technical regs have, in my opinion, not always hit the mark in terms of balancing what is technologically "advanced" and relevant with what can still showcase what the drivers and teams can do with their raw talent, rather than their raw budget. If there is a genuinely dominating force, as there has been throughout the decades, I'm happy to put my hand up and say "Yes, these guys are a step above the rest." Less happy to do it when budget seems the most relative factor for this but, alas, I live in the real world. However, it's still boring. Schumacher/Ferrari in 2002 was boring. So was 2004. So was a lot of 2009. So is now.

Originally Posted by jimclark

"Without any action the sport is nothing." I've been following for fifty years+ and know how close the races were prior (more finishers now on the lead lap than there were finishers;, many times not so long ago the cars were spread out by laps) and I've enjoyed. And lookee here....the sport is still here so I guess it ain't "nothing". Any more choreographing it will be nothing compared to what it was, showcase for, as you stated, the most sophisticated racing machines with the best teams and drivers performing on the real stage...not a scripted one. Again, as you say, at least to me.

For what it's worth, I never agree with "scripting" of races for the sake of creating a pseudo-excitement. Tim Harvey summed up the current state of the BTCC mentioned that it is easier to win races now than in his day (late 80s-1998) due to things like success ballast and reverse grids. But it is harder for one driver to run away and win the championship these days than it was in the past. I like that balance although I'm always open to suggestions about how we can balance handicapping with still allowing the real talents to end up at the front if they have the deserved pace and luck to merit it. I don't like DRS at all. Never did. I didn't mind as much the KERS system as it was across the playing field. So, as previously mentioned, I can deal with 'boring' races - I'll still watch every race weekend - but that doesn't mean they're exciting by virtue of being F1 races. They are not. They are really boring. After two laps I'm a little sick of seeing nice shiny cars in tour.[/quote]

Originally Posted by jimclark

"If you enjoy watching a formation of no overtaking or battling then be my guest but I fell asleep."
'Sorry to hear you fell asleep because you don't appreciate the excellence that we get to witness so many Sundays a year. When the bar is lowered for your excitement, I'll be sad that it's gone, but, at least, I will be able to sleep later on Sunday mornings as I won't be watching, as I don't IndyCar or NASCAR and rarely IMSA.

We're obviously turned on by different things. The racing clearly takes a back seat for you in comparison to the technological advancement of the machines. To me, it's racing. End of. The top drivers going head-to-head with the top teams. And these teams being "the top", not because of money, but because of working damn hard on the technology, working damn hard on their driver selection, working damn hard on their training, their everything! That's why I'm an advocate of budget caps for example. We don't need a spec series in order to bring some parity to the grid.

Lastly, and I'm referring to a post you made in another part of this thread about me perhaps not being aware of the driver's perspective....you're right from the point of view that, no, I've never raced a car. Nor have I raced a kart (except for in some small places for fun). Yet I'm well aware of how much it takes any driver to complete a full race weekend in any stage of the grid, let alone in first position. However, I'm also aware that these drivers do it for a living. They are "the cream of the crop". Hamilton, Vettel, Raikkonen, Alonso et al have been racing for over 10 years in this Formula and they do it like we do our day jobs. I remember hearing drivers who have toured around untroubled to an easy win have even expressed how bored they were out there with no competition. I'll try source examples if needs be. But, even those that put in a fantastic strategy and a perfect weekend together, yes they deserve credit for that. And I don't detract from their excellence in putting together the best package (that is a clear admiration no doubt, unless it is at the expense of another driver who had serious bad luck which happens too of course). But it's still boring and not enough to whet my appetite for what I follow the sport for. And that is RACING. RACING. RACING. I respect you may not see if the same way and that's cool but I hope that I've at least outlined to you that I'm not interested in gimmicks or a spec-series in order to vamp up the on-track excitement.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Adam43

How simple?

Rules that are easy to understand and not overcomplicate thinks that aren’t really necessary and don’t really add anything

[Adam43]

Such as?

How simple? Must have four wheels, but otherwise go for it? Or is it sporting regs? Get to the end of the finish line quickest don’t care how?

I’m with the it might be too complicated, rules are all there for a reason. Saying they should be simpler, is, unfortunately, too simple a suggestion.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by 52Paddy

We're obviously turned on by different things. The racing clearly takes a back seat for you in comparison to the technological advancement of the machines.

Au contraire, mon ami !!!
I love every aspect of auto racing. And there's nothing like a good battle (anywhere in the field) as long as it's not "contrived" by watering down the requirements to succeed just to put on a show. That's what movies are for. Or IndyCar, NASCAR, and BoPed racing (poor Le Mans and sportscar racing in general, no longer even a shadow of itself), not the so called (deservedly so) pinnacle of auto racing.

Thus....advantage?........Me.

Originally Posted by Adam43

Such as?

How simple? Must have four wheels, but otherwise go for it? Or is it sporting regs? Get to the end of the finish line quickest don’t care how?

I’m with the it might be too complicated, rules are all there for a reason. Saying they should be simpler, is, unfortunately, too simple a suggestion.

I say bring back the CanAm (in the same vein, sorta, the early Interserie on the east side of the pond) and the fantastico cars that were in it!!!

Fer instance: http://www.grandprixhistory.org/chap_2J.htm ......and a good site for the uninitiated: http://www.johnkrill.net/canam/index.html

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by jimclark

I say bring back the CanAm (in the same vein, sorta, the early Interserie on the east side of the pond) and the fantastico cars that were in it!!!

Fer instance: http://www.grandprixhistory.org/chap_2J.htm ......and a good site for the uninitiated: http://www.johnkrill.net/canam/index.html

I promise, 'last one. I jus' hadda'. Check out the mini video of the starting of the fans about 1/3 way down the page. https://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsp...al-2j-history/

From the same (to relate to F1...Jackie on the 2J:

The car missed the first two races of the 1970 season. Jackie Stewart went to America to drive the 2J at Watkins Glen, a one-race deal; he qualified third.
"The car's traction, its ability to brake and go deeply into the corners, is something I've never experienced before in a car this size or bulk," he wrote in his book Faster!. "Its adhesion is such that it seems to be able to take unorthodox lines through turns, and this, of course, is intriguing."

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Au contraire, mon ami !!!
I love every aspect of auto racing. And there's nothing like a good battle (anywhere in the field) as long as it's not "contrived" by watering down the requirements to succeed just to put on a show. That's what movies are for. Or IndyCar, NASCAR, and BoPed racing (poor Le Mans and sportscar racing in general, no longer even a shadow of itself), not the so called (deservedly so) pinnacle of auto racing.

Thus....advantage?........Me.

Perceived advantage, perhaps. But again, it's a personal thing. I'm firmly with 52Paddy on this one. We're talking about racing. It's one of the reasons why, notwithstanding some faults, Senna was the ultimate F1 driver for me, because it was all about racing, beating everyone in every session and the race. I'm also a sportscar fan, far more so than an F1 fan, and although I deplore the concept of BoP, I've seen some incredible racing brought about by BoP (such as GTEPro at Le Mans in 2017). With the level of financial and manufacturer support that F1 has, sportscar racing could easily outshadow F1. The pinnacle of auto racing?, again, it depends on what you expect from it. The fact is that many of us expect racing not processions - there are just too many of those. It would be good if the racing was uncontrived, but we live in the real world. And anyhow, if its suggested that F1 is uncontrived auto racing I think that's viewing it through different coloured specs than the ones I'm wearing right now.....

[52Paddy]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Au contraire, mon ami !!!
I love every aspect of auto racing. And there's nothing like a good battle (anywhere in the field) as long as it's not "contrived" by watering down the requirements to succeed just to put on a show. That's what movies are for. Or IndyCar, NASCAR, and BoPed racing (poor Le Mans and sportscar racing in general, no longer even a shadow of itself), not the so called (deservedly so) pinnacle of auto racing.

Thus....advantage?........Me.

I am with you on this despite what my posts may have seemed to suggest. We're on the same page on that matter. But there are races that will not provide action on merit (such is life, eh) and, in those cases (ala Singapore), they get a resounding 1 for unbearable boredom. I remember your point being that the race was very enjoyable mostly because of witnessing Lewis'/Meredes' complete package in putting together an unbeatable combination, that the technology was incredibly spectacular and that seeing the winner "control the pace" (along with all the strategic and physical prowess required) was something worthy of awe. Maybe. But not in my book. If I look at the season as a whole, I can appreciate lots of objective factors about the year and about the sport. When I'm judging a race, there has to be action - whether that is on-track overtaking, strategy battles or other natural factors leading to suspense. And that's what we're doing here, hence my opinion.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by 52Paddy

. I remember your point being that the race was very enjoyable mostly because of witnessing Lewis'/Meredes' complete package in putting together an unbeatable combination, that the technology was incredibly spectacular and that seeing the winner "control the pace" (along with all the strategic and physical prowess required) was something worthy of awe.

Totally unlike Gilles Villeneuve, Jarama 1981 when we didn't know whether he would survive.

[52Paddy]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Totally unlike Gilles Villeneuve, Jarama 1981 when we didn't know whether he would survive.

But, you see, that's what I love about racing. That kind of calibre of race is what fills me full of adrenaline for days on end. I accept that it can't always be that way but, when it's not, I'm merely saying that it's boring. To me at least. And I don't feel like I'm betraying the sport in saying so :-P

[Peter Mallett]

Yes we are in violent agreement.

[S griffin]

Some will always be more exciting than others

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Racing in F1 is a rare occurance. But it does make it all the sweeter when it happens.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

We're talking about racing.

I don't know what you're definition of a race is. I've always thought, and still do, that it is where competitors start, travel a certain distance or time, and whoever completes that distance first, or the most distance first in that time, is the winner; no matter how close or distant the next position is or how it was accomplished.

Newspeak I presume? To that, I don't subscribe.

In addition, we're discussing auto racing here. Particularly, Formula One. Which, lest you have forgotten, is comprised of two championships. One for the drivers. and, very importantly, one for the constructors. Thus, I enjoy both for the very reasons they exist. And, once again, I don't wish the latter to be diminished to provide a show for those that don't care about it. Also, again, the series I mentioned (and more) are already in existence for those that prefer a show.

No mas.

[gert]

With all due respect, but there is a huge difference between racing (procession/follow the leader/ultra boring/Singapore GP) and racing (show/artifical yellows/bunch-up-the-field/NASCAR).
I'm quite sure none of the posters is calling for F1 to be one of those extremes.


By coincidence (because I was not actively looking for it) I happened to watch today's race of the Michelin Le Mans Cup at Spa (minus the first 10 seconds)
Was that a show? I don't think so.
Was that artificial close racing? No, there were a few (just 2?) full course yellows (no safety car) to remove stranded/crashed cars. They were brief, and didn't disrupt the racing.
Were the cars technoligically advanced? No they were not.

But, I did like that race. It was entertaining, there was action, cars were able to follow eachother closely, there were lots of multi-car battles, and the winner wasn't decided until the last 15 minutes of the 2 hour race.

Because it was a nice race, I kept following until the end and for me it was much more interesting than a lot of the F1 races I've seen this year.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by gert

Because it was a nice race, I kept following until the end and for me it was much more interesting than a lot of the F1 races I've seen this year.

Excellent. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

I may have also,...'don't know. I know not of the series, so I have no clue as to the rules. BoPing?

[Akrapovic]

Michelin Le Mans Cup kinda has BoP but not really.

LMP3 class doesn't have BoP, but it does only have 2 realistic chassis manufacturers and a single engine supplier. BoP isn't really needed when you have that few variables. LMP3 regulations allow the ACO to implement a BoP, but they haven't done so yet. The Norma is faster than the Ligier right now, but does seem a little harder to drive. The other LMP3 chassis aren't represented for a variety of reasons.

GT3 class does have BoP but it doesn't adjust and hasn't for years. It's not like Blancpain and other GT3 series which adjusts weekly. But...you could say that's because the class only has 5-6 cars and I think currently there's only 2 manufacturers, but the entry list changes every race so who knows.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Michelin Le Mans Cup kinda has BoP but not really.

LMP3 class doesn't have BoP, but it does only have 2 realistic chassis manufacturers and a single engine supplier. BoP isn't really needed when you have that few variables. LMP3 regulations allow the ACO to implement a BoP, but they haven't done so yet. The Norma is faster than the Ligier right now, but does seem a little harder to drive. The other LMP3 chassis aren't represented for a variety of reasons.

GT3 class does have BoP but it doesn't adjust and hasn't for years. It's not like Blancpain and other GT3 series which adjusts weekly. But...you could say that's because the class only has 5-6 cars and I think currently there's only 2 manufacturers, but the entry list changes every race so who knows.

Thank you. I was just getting ready to do a little research about it.
I'm still a tad confused tho'. Either there is BoPing or there is not in LMP3. If the rules do not specify changing per performance, there's no BoPing.
Thus if a team develops better performance for their car they deserve it, not have their advantage taken away.. If no teams do, and the racing is close, that's even better yet.
If it's not dictated; that's real racing! "Racing" is not synonymous with "close competition".

That's great and I hope fans enjoy as gert did/does.


edit: Disregard my confusion. I thought the non-used BoP was in GT. I have corrected myself upon re-read. Oooopppsss....

[Akrapovic]

For LMP3, the rules allow the ACO to implement a BoP and adjust the speed of the cars, but as of yet, they have not done so. So as of the time of this post, there is no BoP...but that can change any time. I guess if someone came in with a car 2 seconds a lap faster then that rule would be implemented. I agree with your stance of better cars deserve the advantage they get, but you never really know with the ACO lol.

Chances of 'needing' a BoP in LMP3 is quite slim. The cars must be customer cars and sold at a price cap. So the producers can't just sink money into it to be better. There's also a limit to who can build them - manufacturers apply, and the ACO grants licenses to build them. This is the first generation of LMP3 cars, and the ACO granted licenses to Adess, Ginetta, Ligier, Norma and Riley. The Riley is terrible, the Ginetta is even more terrible (and impossible to use because they had a falling out with suppliers), and the Adess hasn't caught on. So the choice is Ligier or Norma.

The Ligier customer support is excellent - they'll even run the cars for you if you pay them. The Norma is a faster car, although tends to be more twitchy. In a series that is all about amateur drivers, that can be a bigger disadvantage than it sounds. So the way things have played out, BoP hasn't been needed as everyone uses the Norma and Ligier and it's pretty close.

Although some will say we're off topic, the idea of forced customer sales as cost caps is something F1 could look at.

Edit: Just caught your edit:

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by jimclark

I don't know what you're definition of a race is. I've always thought, and still do, that it is where competitors start, travel a certain distance or time, and whoever completes that distance first, or the most distance first in that time, is the winner; no matter how close or distant the next position is or how it was accomplished.

Newspeak I presume? To that, I don't subscribe.

JC, I think you and I both know what we mean and debating semantics is only ever going to be amusing for a limited time. Yes, you're definition is absolutely right, but leaves out everything between the green lights and the chequer. That's the bit I call 'the race'. Where competition takes place, where great drivers battle against each other for the edge on the track and yes, where strategy and technology has a part to play. Processions where competition doesn't actually take place, while technically still auto racing, don't get my heart pumping in the way they obviously do yours. It's not a problem for me, I'm happy that you enjoy it and revel in the technical and human excellence that is on display. But to infer that those who want to see racing (rather than an extreme take on Scalextric with most of the cars running in the same groove), have somehow go it wrong, no, I'm not buying into that one. And anyhow, that's my choice......

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by jimclark

I don't know what you're definition of a race is. I've always thought, and still do, that it is where competitors start, travel a certain distance or time, and whoever completes that distance first, or the most distance first in that time, is the winner; no matter how close or distant the next position is or how it was accomplished.

Newspeak I presume? To that, I don't subscribe.

Then why not just watch qualifying if going around a track, i.e. a set distance, in the least amount of time is your definition of racing?
If actual racing disturbs you, maybe just keep it to saturdays then.

[Peter Mallett]

Are we still on topic?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Are we still on topic?

As interesting as the ongoing discussion is, no. Maybe a thread on what constitutes a race/racing?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

As interesting as the ongoing discussion is, no. Maybe a thread on what constitutes a race/racing?

Oh no, please.......

[Akrapovic]

Whilst staying on topic is important, this was a topic that had already served its purpose, so it's not like it is ruining any potential future discussion.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Oh no, please.......

You can start it, if you like?