The Good ol' days

[Slippy Diff]

Originally posted by Armco Bender
The other man,bring back the '70s anytime

Do you remeber the patch he had sewn on his overalls? It said "Sex, the breakfast of champions" I just can't imagine Raikkonen (surely had a personality transplant?) turning up with one of those sewn on his overalls.

[alesi95]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
Just off the top of my head I don't recall '93, '95, '96 and '97 being any better than now. I don't remember stand out races such as Hockenheim only two races ago, or Silverstone '03. Sure '93 had Donington, but Senna and Rubens aside the rest was not up to the depth of field overtaking that happened in the two race I cite. I may be wrong, I'll grab the season reviews later and have a watch.

1986, especially Hungary, now I agree with you there. That move by Piquet was excellent.

1997 was da Bomb!

[Kicking-back]

1997 had multiple winners, which is better than two.

[Son of Jor-El]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
1997 had multiple winners, which is better than two.

I'm glad someone agrees with my earlier post

Originally posted by Son of Jor-El
Hockenheim was good but not on the same level as Siverstone '03.

'97 was a year that stands out, the Mclarens winning for the first time since '93. Hill almost winning at Hungary, Hakkinen's first win, Bergers last (and best), and the infamous Jerez incident! 6 different winners in total.

'96, for the MS fans (not I !) Spain must stand out as a classic.

However I seem to recall that this didn't qualify for this thread!!
Adam, I do understand what you mean when you question whether there was anymore overtaking in '97 than currently. Well, during any one race of the '97 season there was probably less than one of those freakishly wonderful races like Hok '04. But it seems to me over the course of that season there was more action, at almost every race,than at present.......I mean, Hill actually overtook MS.....in Hungary.......in an Arrows!
Sorry, couldn't resist that bit!

[Adam43]

The moment Hill overtook Schumacher was amazing. Fan-blummin-tastic. Ripped me to shreds when he lost the win. However, was that it? In which case we have sussed it. It is only about who you want to win. I miss the emotional attachment I had to Hill and his races. I lived the good and the bad. What is F1 to do about that now? There are no rules or changes that can make people feel what I felt then. It is independent of the rules.

If it is only the result (surely not?) then F1 can't provide it. It comes naturally. I shall have another attachment, I am sure, but that won't come easy. Otherwise it won't be as great.

However all this is irrelevant to the question in hand (if indeed anyone actually knows what the question is). F1 can be improved, I have a list the length of my arm, but it is not a race like Hungary that makes me get the list out. The list was already out.

I'm afraid I view some of the current 'outrage' with annoyance, purely from when it came. Is it just a chance to complain, or be superior? (don't get me wrong I know a lot has come from real heart felt issues, it is just the minority that appear after a bad race, but not a good).

I also view that this is a problem of mine. However I am also of the view that F1 owes me nothing.

[Lotusonpole]

Very true...there were "good old days' races" that were processions just as today, but no where near as many in a season.

Also I do think the cars at least looked more exciting. Of course back then there was much more freedom for designers to try different ideas, so there was a lot of variety in how the cars looked...Lobster claw Brabam, 6 wheel Tyrrel, Lotus...any really as they all seemed to push the envelope...etc.
Also the variety of engine/cylinder configurations made for a glorious symphany of sounds...

But to be fair, as mentioned in another post, there has been some "racing" in some of this seasons races so far, but its always been way behind MS.

Cheers
Peter

[Fan]

There are no suprises anymore. I remember '89 with Alex Caffi having a Dallara up in 3rd place at Phoenix, '90 with Martini on the front row in a Minardi at the same venue. '86 with 1100bhp, no traction control and at Monaco. I used to watch races and think they were super men. No normal person could control those cars. Now we have guys jumping in from Formula Renault, F/BMW, etc and doing decent times straight away. Everything is 3rd or 4th gear corners, loads of run off. Can't buzz the engine, can't miss a gear, traction control, semi automatic gearboxes. Sorry, but the sport is in an absolute mess. They need to start again from scratch, and bring in some people who have a personality...

[Slippy Diff]

Originally posted by Fan
There are no suprises anymore. I remember '89 with Alex Caffi having a Dallara up in 3rd place at Phoenix, '90 with Martini on the front row in a Minardi at the same venue. '86 with 1100bhp, no traction control and at Monaco. I used to watch races and think they were super men. No normal person could control those cars. Now we have guys jumping in from Formula Renault, F/BMW, etc and doing decent times straight away. Everything is 3rd or 4th gear corners, loads of run off. Can't buzz the engine, can't miss a gear, traction control, semi automatic gearboxes. Sorry, but the sport is in an absolute mess. They need to start again from scratch, and bring in some people who have a personality...

Bingo!!! Talk about hiting the nail on the head

[ttc]

Everything is 3rd or 4th gear corners, loads of run off. Can't buzz the engine, can't miss a gear, traction control, semi automatic gearboxes. Sorry, but the sport is in an absolute mess. They need to start again from scratch, and bring in some people who have a personality...

So should we engineer "death traps" around corners so that drivers with less courage will lift and... well, you know the rest...

It's sad that some folks insist on "yesterday" technology and safety specs as being "better". We do have to understand what F1 was and is all about. Quite a few simply believe that it was and is PURELY for the excitement of the fans, and I am sure quite a lot of you out there agree that THAT is absolutely BS. It was and is, first and foremost for the teams to SHOWCASE (or advertise, since we're in the 21st century now) their cars and further enhance their respective consumer machineries. http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/story.htm if you need some history lessons.

[Slippy Diff]

Originally posted by ttc
So should we engineer "death traps" around corners so that drivers with less courage will lift and... well, you know the rest...

How on earth did you read that into his post ??

[Teretonga]

ttc
Your comment is mischevious. This is not a case of this or only that. there are many ways of putting some fire back into GP racing without resorting to 'building death traps' on corners.
The truth is that unfettered investment and technical development, while marvellous in it's on way, has reduced the spectacle of GP racing significantly over the last five to eight years in spite of the efforts of the FIA to regulate both speed and costs.
There are many things that could be done which would not strip the sport of it's safety but would put far more emphasis and value on driver input rather than technical/computer wizardry. SOME of this may return SOME of the spectacle back to GP racing.
'Fan' has valid points in his argument, many of which are echoes of others on other threads from the forums past.

[Lotusonpole]

Sorry...computer glitch.

[Lotusonpole]

I think as long as the safety aspects are adhered to...after all the cars are very strong these days and circuits have been developed with safety in mind...the driver aids can go for me....along with the barge boards and mid -body winglets. So the actual death-trap call is invalid. The nerve of drivers would be tested but they wouldn't be in any greater danger than today if they "fell off".
I do think more freedom for the designers should be resurected then we'll see more cars that look different from each other....rather than people getting "excited" about car A having an end plate thats, whow, a whole 2mm taller than car B.
Am I being cynical?...you bet...lol.

Cheers
Peter

[Sato san]

Originally posted by Slippy Diff
Bingo!!! Talk about hiting the nail on the head

totally agree


Ive just been watching the entire 1987 over the last few weeks.......and i can tell you , that memory doesnt cloud judgement ..

1987 makes this year look like a joke in comparison !!!!..
.
I think F1 has lost its way ...they wil put it right im sure...but at the moment its not what it used to be is it .

[Knowlesy]

Yes, like you sato I have plenty of old races on tape and I enjoy watching those more than this season.

People say nostalgia iputs the blinkers on you but that is bull****, especially if you have the old races on hand!

[PaulSands]

I agree with knowlsey...the outcome of a race was never a foregone conclusion back in the 70's or early 80's because anything could and often did happen...different drivers had different styles that could see them race away only to get hauled in in the latter stages of a race by somebody who had driven with less hooligan tendencies and preserved tyres and fuel

[Kicking-back]

The near 100% reliability of modern Grand Prix cars doesn't help.

[Armco Bender]

Cars of the '60s and 70's weren't that unreliable,the big thing then was most of them had a Ford DFV in the back,so you actually had half a dozen cars that could win any given race.And often did.
Drivers of that period were also real people,not the Hollywood celebrity types that F1 drivers of today are.

[EERO]

Originally posted by ttc
... Quite a few simply believe that it was and is PURELY for the excitement of the fans, and I am sure quite a lot of you out there agree that THAT is absolutely BS. It was and is, first and foremost for the teams to SHOWCASE (or advertise, since we're in the 21st century now) their cars and further enhance their respective consumer machineries.

I've been a fan for more than 30 years. many people on this board belive that the 60's and 70's represented a Golden Age for the sport. During this time, among the myriad of teams, only two had any "consumer machineries" to be "enhanced"-Lotus and those red cars.

The VAST majority of teams in F1 were there becaise they loved to race. That includes all the "Garagistes" as dubbed by old Enzo and the not small number of Privateer Entrants. (Not to be confused with the current use of the term which refers to huge companies who builsd only their chassis without a deal with a Major Manufacturer for Engine supply. The TRUE Privateer buys a chassis and RACES it.

Formula 1 is a Driver's Championship First. Look back to the History of the Sport and you will see that the WCC only was added in 1957. Unfettered technological advances were part of the Team Sport of Sportscar Racing where the Factories were involved. The unlimited advances were in Group 7-the Can AM in Norrth America and Interserie in Europe.

Formula 1 was just a formula to design cars that would challenge drivers to allow the best to rise to the top.

Clearly Herr Schumacher is the best now, but there are several drivers on the grid who shouldn't be there and if the cars were not so easy to drive as is alleged, would not be there.

[ttc]

Originally posted by EERO
Formula 1 is a Driver's Championship First. Look back to the History of the Sport and you will see that the WCC only was added in 1957.
.
.
.

Formula 1 was just a formula to design cars that would challenge drivers to allow the best to rise to the top.

Clearly Herr Schumacher is the best now, but there are several drivers on the grid who shouldn't be there and if the cars were not so easy to drive as is alleged, would not be there.

I do agree wholeheartedly. The point that I'm trying to put across, and apparently wasn't put across, is that it HAS NEVER been for the sake of spectators' (fans or non-fans) ENTERTAINMENT.

I do have to point out that if modern F1 cars are really as easy to drive as proclaimed as compared to cars in the past, then we're probably witnessing some of the worst drivers in the world, drivers who do not know what a brake pedal is for, drivers who can't keep their cars in the tramac etc. No, I believe that the cars are more advanced, ie, no stick shifting, manual clutches, over-revving etc, but in place of those, we have cars that are very sensitive to setups and drivers. Hence we see some drivers struggling to control their cars, while others appear to be having a Sunday drive around the countryside.

[Shangry-La]

Originally posted by ralf fan

Were the drivers braver with their overtaking??

No; they were just braver. Period...

[Kicking-back]

I don't think there's any way to be certain of that.

[Knowlesy]

They were definitely crazier though!

[Shangry-La]

Perhaps not certain, but I don't think that you'd be too much in doubt if you looked closely at the construction of the cars from the 1970s backwards, pre-carbon fibre era...

I interviewed John Watson about this subject a little over ten years ago, and he himself admitted that the thought of racing the chassis he first drove in F1 'put the willies up him'.

Shangry-La

[Knowlesy]

I always think that those guys must have been nuts.

Particularly in the ground effect era, you were sat right up beside the front wheels almost. Your feet were right up the nose of the car. Your head was exposed impossibly. As were your shoulders. Helmets were pretty lame compared to today. The cars crumpled if the wind caught them badly. Roll over hoops were pretty pointless. Side impact resistance was a non-entity.

Todays guys have it so good. AND they are paid more!