Every point has a certain amount of TV dollars tied to it for the teams. No way the top teams are going to vote to give up more of their share for those lowly backmarkers.
Every point has a certain amount of TV dollars tied to it for the teams. No way the top teams are going to vote to give up more of their share for those lowly backmarkers.
maschinenbau said:Rosberg is kinda the worst, but listening to him be absolutely, needlessly contrarian to everything Crofty said was pretty hilarious.
I have no opinion on Rosberg's commentary since I don't watch the races (just the highlights). But I heard one of the various YT'ers mention this. Crofty said "it's cloudy" and Rosberg replied "I disagree, it's sunny with a lot of clouds." Ha!
Same YT'er also mentioned that while he didn't really like Rosberg's commentary, he does find a lot of it more relevant than that of the older retired drivers.
I did chuckle at his assessment on Alonso's race, Crofty said he was having a fantastic drive from 12th back up to 7th following his final pitstop, Nico butted in with, I disagree, he started 3rd so to me that's a very disappointing finish.
It was cytrical, that earth day was the same weekend as the china grand prix, while grass was on fire in damp/wet conditions. The pundit F1 driver environmentalist were silent.
Was it just me that RB pitted Max early so they will actually televise him passing people. I am not mad that RB is so successful, it's the other teams fault that they suck. The fact that they wont even try to race Max is sad, atleast bang wheels with him. I think Ferrari has a decent car but they always do poor jobs with strategy and the other teams are so focused on beating them and not RB.
In reply to trigun7469 :
There's no point in trying to race Max if his race pace is more than a second faster than anyone else's. In that case, the best thing to do is let him get by without losing too much time. And with the current RB ability to pass everything under DRS, Max doesn't have to try to pass.
At some point, he's going to end up with another rival in a car with similar speed again and then we'll see if he's learned anything since 2021.
I've never liked Nico, but I have to say his commentary was a lot more relevant than Crofty. You could tell that Nico had actual experience in these cars and was watching the race at a different level.
trigun7469 said:It was cytrical, that earth day was the same weekend as the china grand prix, while grass was on fire in damp/wet conditions. The pundit F1 driver environmentalist were silent.
Was it just me that RB pitted Max early so they will actually televise him passing people. I am not mad that RB is so successful, it's the other teams fault that they suck. The fact that they wont even try to race Max is sad, atleast bang wheels with him. I think Ferrari has a decent car but they always do poor jobs with strategy and the other teams are so focused on beating them and not RB.
Why race Max when you clearly not racing him?
It will slow you down as well.......you will ruin two of your laps racing him.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I agree, Rosberg was lamenting that Hamilton didn't put up much of a fight with Max in the sprint race. Max pulled a 4 second gap on Lewis over the next two laps I think, and Lewis was not holding up the field. There was no point, get out of Max's way and save your tires for when Checo manages to catch up. The RB is just the best in class, and probably will be until 2026.
In reply to 06HHR (Forum Supporter) :
Max's pace in the sprint race was just SO far ahead of everyone else. I haven't finished watching the GP yet (had a busy weekend and that time slot was not suitable for watching live) but from what I've seen so far, it wasn't that different in the big race either. Is he that dominant at every track and he just doesn't bother to show his full pace to maintain a 6-8s lead, or was he particularly fast in China?
I loved Nico's response when Crofty asked him if he would rather be back out on the track racing and he said he loved being right there, watching the action.
He def knew when to retire.
I also liked Crofty's idea about extending points down to 20th, and maybe even a point for finishing as an incentive to some of the lower placed teams to keep fighting for places, even if it's from 20th.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I honestly think he doesn't show his full pace, works on race setup in the practice sessions because he knows he has a half to a full second in his back pocket for quali. The car isn't slow anywhere, and is a rocketship with DRS. Fastest pit crew in the business, I think they have the fastest stop this year so far and are at least a half to a full second faster at each pit stop so that's a bigger advantage when planning an undercut or overcut. The fizzy drinks team is just a well-oiled machine right now, and Max is driving like a world champ. No reason he doesn't get 5 championships in a row by 2026.
jmabarone said:Every point has a certain amount of TV dollars tied to it for the teams. No way the top teams are going to vote to give up more of their share for those lowly backmarkers.
And thats problem # 769 with how F1 is run.....the teams should have nothing to do with most of the things that they do currently.
kevlarcorolla said:And thats problem # 769 with how F1 is run.....the teams should have nothing to do with most of the things that they do currently.
To a degree, yes, but teams do need to have a say in how the rules change because it can directly effect their bottom line. FIA says we're going to sails and pedal power, goodbye manufacturer support. Absurd example: if the FIA made 2026 to be run at night with no track lighting, how would teams be able to sell advertising on the cars?
jmabarone said:kevlarcorolla said:And thats problem # 769 with how F1 is run.....the teams should have nothing to do with most of the things that they do currently.
To a degree, yes, but teams do need to have a say in how the rules change because it can directly effect their bottom line. FIA says we're going to sails and pedal power, goodbye manufacturer support. Absurd example: if the FIA made 2026 to be run at night with no track lighting, how would teams be able to sell advertising on the cars?
It needs to be a balance. The teams need a say, for sure. They are the ones spending the money, getting the sponsors, etc. Without the teams there is no racing. But, on the other hand, if you give the teams all the power, you end up with CART, and we all know how that turned out. Ultimately, there needs to be one final authority, whether that's one person like a Bernie or a Bill France, or a board of some kind.
Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:
But, on the other hand, if you give the teams all the power, you end up with CART, and we all know how that turned out.
Actually, a lot of blame for that goes to Tony George. CART was getting to the point that the series rivaled Tony's race and he wanted a position on CART's board. CART said no. Well, everybody knows the rest of the story. It came down to the fact that the market couldn't, at that time, support two series and both suffered.
triumph7 said:Actually, a lot of blame for that goes to Tony George. CART was getting to the point that the series rivaled Tony's race and he wanted a position on CART's board. CART said no. Well, everybody knows the rest of the story. It came down to the fact that the market couldn't, at that time, support two series and both suffered.
Oh, trust me, I have plenty of distaste for Tony George and what he did to open-wheel racing. But a major reason that CART lost that war was self-inflicted wounds because the chickens were in charge of the henhouse.
jmabarone said:kevlarcorolla said:And thats problem # 769 with how F1 is run.....the teams should have nothing to do with most of the things that they do currently.
To a degree, yes, but teams do need to have a say in how the rules change because it can directly effect their bottom line. FIA says we're going to sails and pedal power, goodbye manufacturer support. Absurd example: if the FIA made 2026 to be run at night with no track lighting, how would teams be able to sell advertising on the cars?
F1 has never been more flush with cash,and the cost cap ensures they can't spend it all on the car.
In reply to kevlarcorolla :
That only matters if F1 shares more with the teams. But bernie set up a system where the leader got paid first and teams have to really scramble for sponsors to pay for things.
In reply to alfadriver :
What I meant,with the increased interest and eyeballs on the sport sponsors aren't as hard to come by as in the past.
Just an observation;if teams were truly struggling to run as a viable business then I'm confide they could shave at least a couple hundred people to run 2 cars :)
Do you "really" need what 14 people to run out to change 4 tires?. :)
kevlarcorolla said:Do you "really" need what 14 people to run out to change 4 tires?. :)
If you want to do it in 2 seconds, yes. If you want teams to have less you need to make a rule limiting it, otherwise they'll do whatever it takes to be faster.
In reply to kevlarcorolla :
Not sure I agree when you look at some of the bottom feeder sponsors. The only bottom team that has a solid sponsor is RB. But that sponsor will always bias RBR.
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
Couldn't care less how fast the stops are to be honest,or if the cars are slower but the racing better.
Yes they can run closer for longer in the past but its mostly follow the leader still.
Best racing on sunday was for last place in the last couple of laps for example.
I caught a replay of the race.
Rosberg just seems disingenuous most of the time. He seems like a guy I knew in High School who is cool, chill nice dude but keeps wanting to act like a dictator/leader/tough guy. And is very bad at pulling it off. If he just commented more like Jenson Button and other drivers who note how this car seems to have understeer or that driver seems to be saving the right front based on how the car turns in. That level of knowledge Nico shows spurts of, but even Croft pushes Nico to try and do what Nico isn't good at. So he just comes off as sucking at it but doesn't realize he doesn't have to do what the producers or Croft say. I kind of moved past hating him to just feeling sorry for him.
Interesting how Norris held in there. And shock that Lewis did well in the sprint.
Yuki had a bad weekend but seems to be crushing it this year.
Ferrari had a decent but not inspiring day.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:kevlarcorolla said:Do you "really" need what 14 people to run out to change 4 tires?. :)
If you want to do it in 2 seconds, yes. If you want teams to have less you need to make a rule limiting it, otherwise they'll do whatever it takes to be faster.
Exactly didn't they ban helium in the "air" guns for the wheels a few years ago? The teams were using that because it made the gun spin X% faster.
kevlarcorolla said:In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
Couldn't care less how fast the stops are to be honest,or if the cars are slower but the racing better.
Yes they can run closer for longer in the past but its mostly follow the leader still.
Best racing on sunday was for last place in the last couple of laps for example.
The only time pit stop speed is interesting is when something goes wrong. Maybe we institute a minimum stop time of 5 or 10s, might allow the teams a little more ability to tweak the car's setup which is more interesting in the overall race than the difference between 1.9 and 2.1s.
Keith Tanner said:The only time pit stop speed is interesting is when something goes wrong. Maybe we institute a minimum stop time of 5 or 10s, might allow the teams a little more ability to tweak the car's setup which is more interesting in the overall race than the difference between 1.9 and 2.1s.
The original question was do the teams need 14 people on a pit stop, and the answer is that under the current ruleset yes they do. Any fewer means slower pit stops and thus losing positions in the race to teams that do have a full pit crew.
As for whether or not F1 needs to limit the number of people allowed to work on the car -- why? The pit crew mechanics are the same mechanics who work on the car between sessions, it's not like they're getting paid just to do a half dozen 2 second pit stops per weekend. Cutting down on them isn't going to save any money.
There's an aesthetic beauty to a properly executed F1 pit stop. Flawless choreography, it's almost a dance, everything flows so smoothly and whoosh, the car is off again. I like it.
As with many of these sorts of discussions, we already have a half dozen top level series with significant limits on how many people are allowed to work on the car during a pit stop. Why do we need make F1 into yet another of them? Can't we just let it work the way F1 has always worked even if that's different?
You'll need to log in to post.
