[apexit4]

Originally Posted by M5theonlyone

''they have been losing viewership ever since''. True with fans leaving Sky F1 subscription and others as it is expensive and it may be because that there is nothing new coming out and F1 fans need some inspiration. I keep going back to Alonso's comment of it being boring.

I'd be willing to wager Alonso wouldnt be calling the show boring if he was in a Mercedes

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by apexit4

I'd be willing to wager Alonso wouldnt be calling the show boring if he was in a Mercedes

F1 is all about the fans and I keep reading more that even stalwart fans are leaving the sport in droves because of the repeat scenario in every race.
Liberty has to live up to it's name and pressure FIA more into giving existing fans who support other teams and starting by re thinking the cap strategy to benefit all the teams not just the richest and it's outdated voting system.

[apexit4]

Originally Posted by M5theonlyone

F1 is all about the fans and I keep reading more that even stalwart fans are leaving the sport in droves because of the repeat scenario in every race.
Liberty has to live up to it's name and pressure FIA more into giving existing fans who support other teams and starting by re thinking the cap strategy to benefit all the teams not just the richest and it's outdated voting system.

Out of curiosity, would you prefer that Liberty has free reign over changes to F1 or a switch to where only the majority of teams have to agree to any regulation changes?

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by apexit4

Out of curiosity, would you prefer that Liberty has free reign over changes to F1 or a switch to where only the majority of teams have to agree to any regulation changes?

I'm glad you asked that, myself I would think that there's nothing better than walking feet on the ground, the majority of teams to discuss and vote on any anomalies in the regs, on all things playable for all teams.More team votes for change would seal it.
After all an F1 Super Licence should mean a super vote, Liberty would be advising of the transition and FIA naturally would police it as is their job.

[David70]

Originally Posted by apexit4

I'd be willing to wager Alonso wouldnt be calling the show boring if he was in a Mercedes

He would likely feel the same about the sport but I agree wouldn't say anything. You don't have to agree with the system to decide to take advantage of it and keep your mouth shut. I also wonder about how closely former drivers keep up to date with F1 after they leave.

Drivers have no problem with dominating no matter the event is, Hamilton enjoys showing up to a race of 2-4 drivers and I think one of the major reasons he wants to keep Bottas as Bottas goes along with the program and makes no waves. No chance he would want to bring a young up and coming driver to the team even if he knew it was better for the sport (or even the team).

I also don't agree with any system that requires unanimous decisions to make a change. If not majority only at least make is some percentage.

[243Racing]

I must be in the minority here, I have absolutely no interest in 'reverse grids'. It sounds like spectacle for spectacle's sake

[apexit4]

Originally Posted by BeastieBombRacing

I must be in the minority here, I have absolutely no interest in 'reverse grids'. It sounds like spectacle for spectacle's sake

I dont think you are in the minority. I recently read an article where Toto is quoted saying that polls show that most fans oppose reverse grids. He didnt say which poll showed this though. Another website that I frequent for F1 news did a poll on this topic as well. About 75% of those who answered were opposed to the idea. These arent exactly the most reliable ways of gauging fans support/opposition to the idea, but the feeling that Im getting from reading comments and polls is that most people are opposed to it.

[David70]

I would be interested in reading the data on the poll that Toto references.

I think this season will always have an "*" by it because of the virus and I am not sure if I would prefer the reverse order or not. Turns out it doesn't matter as it is a dead issue.

I do think a race, reverse results for next race, then combine the overall points would be far more interesting and I think require more skill to come out ahead overall but possibly a gimmick. I would be more likely to watch it from start to end. Hamilton's without a doubt a great driver but I wonder how much he is challenged when he starts from poll and drives off, only to ever pass others under blue flags. Listen to one of the top drivers talk about starting from the back because of penalties and they talk about how difficult it is.

My guess is I will be back to turning a two hour race into a 30 minute show.

[rcracin]

Im pretty sure there isn’t a team or driver who isn’t greedy to win.

[dtla1]

Can I throw in Random Starting Grid Positions as a test to be had.

Instead of doing Qualy at all, just pull numbers from a hat, or balls from a cage or whatever. It inputs a bit more "luck" into the equation, yes maybe a bit gimmiky, but overall, could result in interesting racing. Imagine, Russel-P1, Magnussen-P2, Albon-P3, Sergio Perez P-4, and on and on. Just completely random.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the importance of qualifying overall in racing.

[mk1-fan]

Originally Posted by BeastieBombRacing

I must be in the minority here, I have absolutely no interest in 'reverse grids'. It sounds like spectacle for spectacle's sake

I feel the same. Even though DRS aids overtaking, in principle I am against that as well. Any form of artificial racing should be avoided.

Also, why should Toto agree to something that will clearly diminish their advantage? They didn't get to where they are by luck.

[David70]

Originally Posted by mk1-fan

I feel the same. Even though DRS aids overtaking, in principle I am against that as well. Any form of artificial racing should be avoided.

Also, why should Toto agree to something that will clearly diminish their advantage? They didn't get to where they are by luck.

Because it is a business that requires the organization as a whole to function and be profitable. Same reason professional sports in the U.S. have revenue sharing, because they realize it makes the organization overall better and more competitive, attractive for fans and with this the teams values and sponsorship goes up. Toto by himself may not care but MB and their sponsors care. Toto is head of the team but I don't believe for a second that he doesn't consult with the people above before he give the organizations opinion. If they will never vote for anything that might diminish his advantage, and every decision has to pass 100% I see the current trend continuing where outside the top 3 teams you are just racing for points, there is no chance you will win a race, weakest teams are fighting for 15th place or hoping for DQ's and often the best racing is around 8-12 place. Amazing how little MB is on TV in the races they walk away with.

Williams needs another billionaire looking for a hobby or trying to get his son a drive as it is a really tough sell to someone that wants to invest in a profitable business. Billionaires buying teams as a hobby and the richest drivers getting drives is another issue with F1. The rich drivers don't care but the sport suffers.

Instead of sharing revenue they went with spending caps which I think will turn out to be a joke. Ferrari threatens to leave if they don't get exactly what they want but both sides would lose, Ferrari isn't in F1 as a charity, their company and brand would lose value if they left.

[243Racing]

Originally Posted by David70

Because it is a business that requires the organization as a whole to function and be profitable. Same reason professional sports in the U.S. have revenue sharing, because they realize it makes the organization overall better and more competitive, attractive for fans and with this the teams values and sponsorship goes up. Toto by himself may not care but MB and their sponsors care. Toto is head of the team but I don't believe for a second that he doesn't consult with the people above before he give the organizations opinion. If they will never vote for anything that might diminish his advantage, and every decision has to pass 100% I see the current trend continuing where outside the top 3 teams you are just racing for points, there is no chance you will win a race, weakest teams are fighting for 15th place or hoping for DQ's and often the best racing is around 8-12 place. Amazing how little MB is on TV in the races they walk away with.

Williams needs another billionaire looking for a hobby or trying to get his son a drive as it is a really tough sell to someone that wants to invest in a profitable business. Billionaires buying teams as a hobby and the richest drivers getting drives is another issue with F1. The rich drivers don't care but the sport suffers.

Instead of sharing revenue they went with spending caps which I think will turn out to be a joke. Ferrari threatens to leave if they don't get exactly what they want but both sides would lose, Ferrari isn't in F1 as a charity, their company and brand would lose value if they left.

Reverse grids isn't like revenue sharing. It's letting the Browns have the ball 5 times in a row at the beginning of the game because they're playing the Chiefs and they have no chance otherwise.

[David70]

Originally Posted by BeastieBombRacing

Reverse grids isn't like revenue sharing. It's letting the Browns have the ball 5 times in a row at the beginning of the game because they're playing the Chiefs and they have no chance otherwise.

I already said I wasn't sure if reverse grids were good or not, I was replying to the quote that Toto would never vote for something that wasn't to his advantage. You think this is as good as F1 can get or do you have some idea to make it better?

Do you believe F1 is as interesting as it was 20 years ago? Can you explain to someone that doesn't watch F1 how we hope there are 2-3 teams fighting for win at each race (always the same teams) but often the it is 1-2 drivers and they are on the same team and we are hoping it rains to make it interesting?

Edit - Also, reverse grids, if done right, are not like giving one team the ball 5 times in a row. One option is starting the next race in the reverse order of the last race. Long term results will still have the best teams coming out on top and the worst teams will still have no chance of winning. Everyone is still playing by the same rules and far different than handicapping the best.

[243Racing]

Originally Posted by David70

I already said I wasn't sure if reverse grids were good or not, I was replying to the quote that Toto would never vote for something that wasn't to his advantage. You think this is as good as F1 can get or do you have some idea to make it better?

Do you believe F1 is as interesting as it was 20 years ago? Can you explain to someone that doesn't watch F1 how we hope there are 2-3 teams fighting for win at each race (always the same teams) but often the it is 1-2 drivers and they are on the same team and we are hoping it rains to make it interesting?

I don't know, because I've only been following F1 for ~6 years.

Look, I agree that it's lost a lot of its intrigue with Merc's domination of the hybrid turbo era. But I'd suggest something like BOP before I'd ever agree to reverse grids. I'll also repeat my complete befuddlement at the fact that there's only two companies in the world that can make a competitive F1 engine. And if that's the case, then give everyone the same engine, and let them develop it as much as they want to.

Just because we have a legitimate problem doesn't mean we need a stupid solution.

[David70]

Originally Posted by BeastieBombRacing

I don't know, because I've only been following F1 for ~6 years.

Look, I agree that it's lost a lot of its intrigue with Merc's domination of the hybrid turbo era. But I'd suggest something like BOP before I'd ever agree to reverse grids. I'll also repeat my complete befuddlement at the fact that there's only two companies in the world that can make a competitive F1 engine. And if that's the case, then give everyone the same engine, and let them develop it as much as they want to.

Just because we have a legitimate problem doesn't mean we need a stupid solution.

Companies like Lotus and Williams, if they did things right had a legitimate chance of winning. I think those days are gone. I think the last 6 years have been some of the worst when it comes to the interest in the engine and overall race.

Spec racing (give everyone the same engine) does have its benefits but also negatives. Purists will never go for it, MB, Ferrari, Mclaren, Renault, also won't as only one would remain. I wouldn't do engines but do think some amount of "spec" makes sense, maybe transmissions (most would be amazed out how few options come on production auto's), maybe brakes, maybe some body parts. All cost reductions and loses some of the "pinnacle of motorsports", but for me I would like far more parity in the grid and something needs to change.

[243Racing]

Originally Posted by David70

Companies like Lotus and Williams, if they did things right had a legitimate chance of winning. I think those days are gone. I think the last 6 years have been some of the worst when it comes to the interest in the engine and overall race.

Spec racing (give everyone the same engine) does have its benefits but also negatives. Purists will never go for it, MB, Ferrari, Mclaren, Renault, also won't as only one would remain. I wouldn't do engines but do think some amount of "spec" makes sense, maybe transmissions (most would be amazed out how few options come on production auto's), maybe brakes, maybe some body parts. All cost reductions and loses some of the "pinnacle of motorsports", but for me I would like far more parity in the grid and something needs to change.

I agree with the idea that F1 should be the 'pinnacle of motorsport' and that teams should be allowed, with few restrictions, to build the best car they possibly can. But...that's obviously not working.

[yco]

0:50..

[243Racing]

Originally Posted by yco

0:50..

That’s about all you need to know about reverse grids.

[M5Rick]

Of course the leading drivers are against it..they don't want to start at the back but they must realise that F1 not all about them for their comfort, it's not a closed shop.

[243Racing]

Originally Posted by M5theonlyone

Of course the leading drivers are against it..they don't want to start at the back but they must realise that F1 not all about them for their comfort, it's not a closed shop.

"The people who are suggesting it don't know what they're talking about"

[David70]

Originally Posted by M5theonlyone

Of course the leading drivers are against it..they don't want to start at the back but they must realise that F1 not all about them for their comfort, it's not a closed shop.

X2, you would get the same response on anything that made their chances of winning go down. Ask Lewis what we should do about the "problem" of 1-2 teams having 95% chance of winning every race and I think you will hear a lot of "work harder, try harder".

Main goal of all three of them is to place as high as possible and win races, their goal and my overall goal (watching an interesting race) are far different.