Does Motor Sport Punish all the wrong people?

Fr0dders · 17 Aug 2006 at 21:39

Formula 1 has to be the number one cluprit of this

their so called restrictions do nothing to slow down the racing, or to make the racing better. they just force the teams to come up with other ways to achieve the same thing

prime examples that come to mind are the banning of Turbos and the requirement to use V8s instead of V10s this year.

some of them, like launch control, i agree with, as that detracted from driver skill and would have made a mockery of the skill in getting a perfect start.

but some of what they restricted was sheer stupidity, like the banning of slicks.

they complain about driver safety and what have you. but its nancy men talk. Fangio and Moss and the like all knew that what they were doing was dangerous, they lost many friends due to accidents in motorsport, but that was what made it so thrilling. If soldiers can choose to risk their lives in wars they dont really believe in, then surely race car drivers can choose to drive fast and risk dieing ?

robbiemc · 18 Aug 2006 at 00:34

MrLOL said:
they complain about driver safety and what have you. but its nancy men talk. Fangio and Moss and the like all knew that what they were doing was dangerous, they lost many friends due to accidents in motorsport, but that was what made it so thrilling. If soldiers can choose to risk their lives in wars they dont really believe in, then surely race car drivers can choose to drive fast and risk dieing ?

Nancy men talk? What a load of rubbish. Fangio, Moss etc didn't have an option about the danger of the sport, I can assure you that they would've liked it be safer thankyouverymuch.
Jackie Stewart was one of the first drivers to actively take a stand to make the sport safer after an accident resulted in him being trapped in his F1 car with the cockpit filling up with fuel, due to the fuel-tanks being located right next to the driver. I'm quite sure he would have something to say about it being 'Nancy talk'.
I have enormous respect for those drivers who really did lay their lives on the line, but thankfully things are different and a lot safer now.

F1 is still a dangerous sport, but if I understand you correctly you'd rather the drivers be at a greater risk for your enjoyment? Indeed, why should sport have to be dangerous to be exciting? I found some of this years World Cup to be exciting, but I don't recall anyone planting landmines on the pitch to 'spice things up'.
The thrill of F1 for me is in close, exciting racing..such as the last race in Hungary where there was (for a change) plenty of close racing. In fact, this season could well be turning into close one with the top two drivers so close at the top.

How can you liken war to sport? No one should die in sport, if they do its a tragic result of something going wrong, unfortunately war is totally different.

Fr0dders · 18 Aug 2006 at 09:07

robbiemc said:
F1 is still a dangerous sport, but if I understand you correctly you'd rather the drivers be at a greater risk for your enjoyment? Indeed, why should sport have to be dangerous to be exciting? I found some of this years World Cup to be exciting, but I don't recall anyone planting landmines on the pitch to 'spice things up'.

it doesnt "have" to be dangerous to be exciting. but when things are taken from the sport in the name of "safety" its ruins it slightly

formula 1 has constantly punished the innovaters, usually in the name of "safety", which is wrong.

and the point i was making is, if the innovations lead to faster track speeds and lap times, so what ? if the drivers want to take the risks they will. The ruling authorities are making decisions for them

because as you rightly point out with jackie stewart, if they dont like it they wont race.

JRS · 18 Aug 2006 at 09:22

I think Stirling Moss had it right when he said that every driver out there has the option of driving slower if they feel in danger. If they don't, then they've accepted the risk.

If the rules were relaxed somewhat, and cars were faster, then nothing would be forcing the drivers to actually drive them any faster than they do now. Some would, and they would be the winners and champions as they would be able to drive just that little bit faster than the rest of the field.

As an aside, one thing that I think should be banned right away is refuelling. You want to keep engine power levels under control? Give them a fuel limit, they'll soon start to sacrifice power for fuel economy. Put them back on soft, sticky slicks that need to be changed a couple of times in a race and you'll soon get some overtaking back. Winner will be the driver who pushed at the right time so as not to use up all his fuel before the flag, and kept some tyre grip for that push.

rpstewart · 18 Aug 2006 at 09:46

JRS said:
As an aside, one thing that I think should be banned right away is refuelling. You want to keep engine power levels under control? Give them a fuel limit, they'll soon start to sacrifice power for fuel economy. Put them back on soft, sticky slicks that need to be changed a couple of times in a race and you'll soon get some overtaking back. Winner will be the driver who pushed at the right time so as not to use up all his fuel before the flag, and kept some tyre grip for that push.

Ahh, late 80s rules. You're right, refuelling needs to go. There's a level of skill required to be able to drive a car who's weight changes dramatically over the course of the race. I'd also like to see tyres to be a bit harder than they are at the moment, not much but enough to last a full race distance if you look after them. Changing tyres should still be allowed but pit crews should be limited to four or six people at the most so that the benefit of changing is marginal. That then gives you three options of running the race:

1) Fast first third wrecks the tyres then change and manage them to the finish - the Senna approach

2) Manage the tyres through half distance, change and then charge for the flag - the Prost approach

3) Manage the one set of tyres for the entire distance - the "how come Ivan Capelli is leading?" approach.

penski · 18 Aug 2006 at 10:03

rpstewart said:
3) Manage the one set of tyres for the entire distance - the "how come Ivan Capelli is leading?" approach.

That is literally the first time I've guffawed whilst reading Motors.

Thank you.

*n

JRS · 18 Aug 2006 at 11:50

rpstewart said:
1) Fast first third wrecks the tyres then change and manage them to the finish - the Senna approach

2) Manage the tyres through half distance, change and then charge for the flag - the Prost approach

3) Manage the one set of tyres for the entire distance - the "how come Ivan Capelli is leading?" approach.

4) Hang back off the two leading Mclarens for most of the race, waiting for Prost's car to break and Senna's to get driven into and take an emotional one-two at your team's home GP - The 1988 Ferrari at Monza approach.

***edit***

I lol'd at the Ivan Capelli comment as well!