Can we finally agree that F1 is not about skill, but the main point is who has the best car? >ferrari is the best schumacher is winning for years, as soon as ferrari became obsolete he becomes obsolete aswell >renault is the best Alonso is winning for two years, as soon as renault becomes obsolete he becomes obsolete aswell >mclaren becomes the best Hamilton is winning for years, as soon as mclaren becames obsolete hamiltom becomes obsolete aswell
Now ferrari is great again and Leclerc will win everything. Literally boringfest
Why did they install toilet seats on the top of the cars? It looks so bad.
Renault was never the best McLaren was better in 2005 and Ferrari was better in 2006 Fernando was not obsolete in Ferrari and salvaged their reputation while they were making shit cars
>Can we finally agree that F1 is not about skill, but the main point is who has the best car? Welcome to F1, did you enjoy Drive to Survive?
>As soon as ferrari become obselete schumi does as well Tell me you have only watched f1 for three years without telling me youve only watched f1 for three years. Schumi retired from a championship winning ferrari, who then went on to win AGAIN the very next year. He left the grid YEARS before ferrari were 'obselete'
No shit bro
>Can we finally agree that F1 is not about skill, but the main point is who has the best car? That has been agreed since literally the first F1 race
>Can we finally agree that football is not about skill, but the main point is who has the best team?
explain then last year bucko
Ferrari was dogshit when Schumi joined and Schumi built the team into a dynasty
Hamilton had the best car in 2007 and 2012 but lost the championships to Ferrari and Red Bull
McLaren was faster but unreliable Ferrari very simply was not better
by that logic then you could make all the cars slow since it's safer.
It's a team vs team sport you fucking idiot. The whole point is trying to build the best car.
>shit cars renaults v8 was too op for blown diffuser era
Would've been a blessing in hindsight considering all he does these days is talk about how he almost died in a crash.
No, he also crashes Indycars now, too. Sometimes he doesn't crash and instead ends up with a highlight reel of overtakes, though.
motogp is way better
liberty would if they could get away with it
thanks for your opinion. you can go and touch grass now.
As a long time F1 fan, I've got a lot of mixed feelings about Drive To Survive. On one hand, it's introduced our great sport to lots of people and brought them in. And to quote Martin Brundle, if you're new to F1, welcome. I hope you love it. The amount of people I know who are massively into F1 compared to as recent as 5 years ago is hugely significant. It's taken what may have been seen as a fringe sport and made it mainstream. That's a fantastic thing. But I also can't stand Drive to Survive. As someone that watches every session and follows the sport year round, it's impossible to take it seriously. It presents itself as a documentary, when it's really a "based on true events" Soap Opera. There's rarely extended periods of silence after a crash before a driver radios to say he's okay. This is a dangerous sport. People die. Seeing Netflix play up that danger really rubs me the wrong way. Also the fake rivalries it tries to create can get in the bin. Netflix trying to portray Lando and Carlos as enemies was ridiculous. Editing in radio messages from different races, presenting false narratives. It makes Drive to Survive completely unwatchable to me. So the show has major issues. If they keep it up, soon no drivers will take part and they'll ruin their own party. Hopefully they sort it out so they can continue to bring people in to our great sport. The more people watching and loving F1, the better.
Indent get why people think this is a bad thing. The only thing I take from that argument is that they’re simpletons who can’t understand anything besides x athlete vs y athlete.
You're 100% right. It's not a sport and no amount of seething will change that a car is not an athlete.
Because it's not a sport. If it was sold as car manufacturer vs car manufacturer, instead of driver vs driver to make it look more like a "real sport" instead of the car manufacturing competition it actually is, then people wouldn't be shitting on it so much.
Red bull had the fastest car for most of the season, so they won
Also he is doing well at indycar, though he is stuck with a fucking Andretti Honda.
So like any other sport where the most stacked team wins?
anglo cope kek
I tried watching F1 a while ago, but then I figured out that the person who starts in pole position usually wins anyway Just look at the qualifying results and save yourself the time
It's a motorsport so ofc cars are the real athletes much like race horses. To be a driver or jockey takes some skill but it's limited to the vehicle's performance. Wasn't McLaren kinda shit during Senna's era though?
why do foreigners always try this cope both mercedes and F1 are based in england, with english staff and workers. horner, an english man, is the executive of red bull racing even.
Driver factor is not 0 though so it’s not only about the cars, and it’s not just about the cars and drivers… I don’t know what is so hard to understand about this
>Wasn't McLaren kinda shit during Senna's era though? They were possibly the most dominant team in f1 history lol. The MP4/4 won and got pole every race bar 1
>Wasn't McLaren kinda shit during Senna's era though? No, they were clearly the best team and won 4 constructor's titles in a row. The MP4/4 was one of the most dominant cars ever. That doesn't diminish Senna's achievements, since the Senna/Prost driver pairing was probably the best in the history of the sport and Senna was more than a match for Prost.
>as soon as mclaren becames obsolete hamiltom becomes obsolete aswell Not quite. McLaren was still the best in the latter half of 2009 and all throughout 2010 at the very least. It was very much Hamilton's "skill" that sank the ship. Which is also why I'm very reluctant when it comes to Mercedes' performance this year: The car might still be very competitive, just not as dominant as before, with Hamilton getting practically nothing out of it.
t.seething vershitten fanboi
>1994: Williams was the fastest car, got destroyed by Schumacher in a Benetton >1996: Ferrari was the fastest car, got annihilated by SEVERE reliability issues (16 Ret/DNS against just 7 from williams) >1999: Ferrari was the fastest car, Schumi's leg exploded mid-season >2003: Mclaren was the fastest car, Gimi lost the championship because of reliability issues >2006: Ferrari was the fastest, Nando got them really good. >2007: Mclaren was the fastest car, Cheeky gimi capitalized on their poor team environment. >2008: Ferrari was the fastest, glock shat the bed in the last corner. >2010: RB was fastest yeah, but Nando shat the bed severely in the last race >2012: Same as 2010 >2021: AMX won against a Rocketship powered by globohomo agenda
: Ferrari was the fastest, glock shat the bed in the last corner. No. McLaren was still the outright illegal one from 2007. >2010: RB was fastest yeah No. Again, McLaren was clearly the best package.
>made up of the players and their athletic aptitude You can't really be that dumb can you?
f1 is a reddit sport now. pre 2008 is only relevant like most things
I still believe the 2012 McLaren was the quickest car, it just had shit reliability. There is a timeline in which Hamilton doesn't DNF as often, wins his second championship in 2012 and doesn't go to Mercedes, making the 2014 Merc lineup Rosberg/Hülkenberg or something lol
Yeah no shit. If they wanted to find the best driver they’d have them all drive the same car. It’s just a way for car companies to jerk themselves off
GREAT HONEST AND ACCURATE OPINION
>It’s just a way for car companies to jerk themselves off Traditionally, it's defined as a competition of technological advancement. The cars are the athletes, the minds behind them (designers, constructors, mechanics, and, yes, the drivers as well) are the ones who compete by doing their part and bringing everyone's efforts together. The problem with that definition is that the sport has reached a point where technological advancement is severely limited by the rules and less about building a more powerful package than about finding loopholes they can get away with, or simply a much stronger or much more reliable power unit.
There is something I don't quite get about modern F1.
It was always basically a stupid, wasteful sport. Two hundred dollars for a tiny wheel screw; ten thousand dollars for each front wing, massive waste of tyres, fuel, etc. That wasn't just a feature - it was the essence of it. A "rich" automobile sport if you may.
Flash forward and we have fuel-saving measures, uniform tyres, wider cars to make shit safer but make overtaking harder... Seems like every new regulation is gutting the idea of "fuck it, let's pour tons of money to have fun like never before".
Which is stupid. You undercut the excitement while still spending loads of cash. It's like giving body armor to MMA fighters.
this guy should have been culled
because sports are globohomo
No he wouldn't he went backwards into the barrier and in the case that he didn't the halo isn't going to stop the barrier from just going through to where his head is since it only protects from objects coming from a higher direction and in simulations wouldn't even have prevented Jules's injury
Tell ME you’ve only watched F1 for three years. Kimi fell backwards into 2007 because the two McLels were tripping over each other the whole season.
It was sold that way until Ecclestone seized control of the sport and started marketing based on the drivers rather than the teams. I think the first guy this really became a problem with was Senna; he built a cult of personality around him who did not care what car he was in, so long as he was driving. And his rivalry with Prost is what catapulted F1 into being THE motorsport championship in the eyes of normalfags. Since then, F1 realised the economic value of superstar drivers and has been trying to recapture that rabid fanbase ever since. Schumacher in the late 90s-early 00s was that way for a lot of Germans, then Alonso for Spain. Then Hamilton for the British. And now Verstappen for the Dutch. All just trying to copy Sennamania.
McLel only did it in 1988. Ferrari did it 2-3 years in the early 00s, and Mercedes did it in 2014-2016 and again in 2020.
>1994 Williams the fastest Nah, the illegal Benetton was. And Schumacher only won because he crashed out his championship rival after he damaged his own car and knew he was gonna lose. >2003 McLaren was the fastest Maybe over a single lap. But races aren’t over a single lap. >2006 Ferrari the fastest Nah. >2012 Nando lost because of him getting crashed out by fucking Big John in Spa
Everything else is correct
I better not here these drivers referred to as athletes ever again. Being a rich manlet is not an athletic trait
Because normalfags don’t like the idea of one team sprinting away with it every season, so the FIA has been enacting rules to “increase parity”. Funny thing is, every change they’ve made since 1998 has had the opposite effect. In 1998 they made the cars narrower and the tyres worse to ‘slow cars down’ and ‘reduce costs’. Led to Ferrari having a winrate of about 68% over the next 7 years. So in 2006 they made the engines smaller to ‘reduce costs and slow cars down’, and it led to Renault-powered cars winning the next ⅝ championships. In 2009 they drastically lessened the aero and made the gimmick high-deg tyres to ‘reduce costs and slow the cars down’, and it led to Red Bull walking away with every championship until 2013, when they changed the regs to ‘make the cars more road-relevant’. Which allowed Mercedes to walk away with the championship for the next 7 years.
Schumi was a Brawn babby
NOOOOOOOOOO WHY CANT MAX WIN WITH MASIS HELP LIKE USUAL, IM NEVER WATCHING THIS SPORT AGAIN
Well, driving an F1 car does require athletic feats. It's physically demanding. Calling the drivers "athletes" is justified in that context. Calling F1 a driver competition however is, for the most part, not, since the driver rarely ever makes a difference, and whenever he does, its usually by fucking up like Hamilton did multiple times when he had the strongest car of the field.
Many drivers in history made the difference when the cars were equally matched or even winning in an inferior car
It happened last year alone
>when the cars were equally matched Very rare. Might even have never been the case. >even winning in an inferior car Whenever that happens, it's usually less by virtue of being the better driver, but more by virtue of not fucking up as often as the total shitter that was in the much better car. Like Kimi against Hamilton in 2007, Max against Hamilton in 2021 and almost Massa against Hamilton in 2008. Schumacher did not win against Hill in 1994 because he accomplished superhuman things, he won because Hill fucked up massively. Yes, that means the better driver won, but not because he was better, but because the worse driver was worse.
>it’s not because he was the better driver, it’s because the other driver was worse