Discussion:
Formula 1 - "Is the 22nd most boring thing about modern life"
Add Reply
m***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-01-30 21:32:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Something for the new owners Liberty Media to consider, a UK survey of the 50 most boring things included Formula 1 at number 22;


1. Party Political broadcasts

2. Being kept on hold

3. Queuing in the post office

4. Traffic jams

5. Shopping channels

6. Doctor waiting rooms

7. Slow Wi-Fi

8. Waiting for a delivery

9. Train delays

10. Ad breaks

...

22. Formula One

...


46. Buying socks

47. Washing the dishes

48. Gardeners World

49. Small talk

50. Alan Titchmarsh


The full list - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/can-you-guess-most-boring-5596113


I think the problem started in the mid-1980's or so, when these things happened or soon arrived;

1. The cars eventually outgrew most of the circuits at that point, sterile circuits were added, and `untameable' circuits like the old Osterreichring or old Mexico City etc were removed. So too easy for the engineers to create cars which constantly hog the racing line without fail and thereby block all the following cars.

2. The H-pattern gearbox was abandoned in favour of the paddle shift (yes I mean you Williams). A missed gear change could occur at any time and always created a passing opportunity. Now you can't miss a gear.

3. Indycar began to be increasingly shown, along with the inevitable racing contrast (brought about by constant pace cars phases).

4. Lotus totally dominated in 1963 and 1965 and 1978, but that isn't a lot of years over that total time. But for some reason when McLaren did it in 1984 it seemed to herald an era to this day where one car domination in a season is more or less the norm not an exception.

5. Alain Prost became as a key driver - who (brilliant though he was of course) proved that winning races and titles without taking too many risks was at least as good an overall strategy (if not better) than trying to win them by taking lots of risks. Compare with Juan Pablo Montoya in F1 - is the final corner at Hockenheim named after him? It should be since he crashed there that often through overdoing it - even on the parade lap once. And Button v Hamilton at McLaren - say no more. Bits of that Spa polystyrene sign from Hamilton's collision with Kobayashi have yet to land. So another haul of points for you there Jenson - who always acknowledged Alain as his inspiration of course. Risk taking should pay if you want exiting racing - and it doesn't.

6. The TV companies actually covering it eventually started saying it was boring themselves during it - Ratner II.
Bigbird
2017-01-30 21:56:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@yahoo.co.uk
Something for the new owners Liberty Media to consider, a UK survey
of the 50 most boring things included Formula 1 at number 22;
1. Party Political broadcasts
2. Being kept on hold
3. Queuing in the post office
4. Traffic jams
5. Shopping channels
6. Doctor waiting rooms
7. Slow Wi-Fi
8. Waiting for a delivery
9. Train delays
10. Ad breaks
...
22. Formula One
...
46. Buying socks
47. Washing the dishes
48. Gardeners World
49. Small talk
50. Alan Titchmarsh
The full list -
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/can-you-guess-most-boring-5596113
That's 2015, this is 2017.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/traffic-jams-kardashians-emptying-bins-9700111

So the positive spin is that people would rather watch F1 than do those
26 other things...

However, rice cakes more interesting than F1... that's worrying.
brafield
2017-01-30 23:13:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Nine minutes of joyful complaining for you all:



brafield
2017-01-30 23:19:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by brafield
http://youtu.be/2w84qzHdEms
Not only Brum but also

Hamburg Germany (My favourite underwear is always out of stock")

t***@gmail.com
2017-01-31 00:34:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by brafield
http://youtu.be/2w84qzHdEms
Fuck off queer
Bobster
2017-01-31 03:14:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@yahoo.co.uk
I think the problem started in the mid-1980's or so, when these things happened or soon arrived;
1. The cars eventually outgrew most of the circuits at that point, sterile circuits were added, and `untameable' circuits like the old Osterreichring or old Mexico City etc were removed. So too easy for the engineers to create cars which constantly hog the racing line without fail and thereby block all the following cars.
2. The H-pattern gearbox was abandoned in favour of the paddle shift (yes I mean you Williams). A missed gear change could occur at any time and always created a passing opportunity. Now you can't miss a gear.
I think you'll find you should be blaming Ferrari for this. Their 1989 car had a semi-auto transmission - the first of it's kind in F1. Williams ran semi-auto in 1991. It took a couple more years for the system to become ubiquitous.
Post by m***@yahoo.co.uk
3. Indycar began to be increasingly shown, along with the inevitable racing contrast (brought about by constant pace cars phases).
Indycar had the pace car before F1. I would think that in the UK, Indycar became a big deal in 1993 when Mansell went to that series.
Post by m***@yahoo.co.uk
4. Lotus totally dominated in 1963 and 1965 and 1978, but that isn't a lot of years over that total time. But for some reason when McLaren did it in 1984 it seemed to herald an era to this day where one car domination in a season is more or less the norm not an exception.
Well, there were some other early examples. Tyrell (Stewart) were dominant in 1971. Merc were dominant in 1955. Alfa early on. If there had been a WCC in 1952 then Ferrari would have won it by miles. So the 50s saw lots of seasons where a car was dominant. But F1 was not shwon in entire seasons on TV.

I think the longer seasons and increases in reliability exaggerated the dominance effect. Over a longer season the gap would increase, and a race with mechanical problems would be 1 out of 16 rather than 1 out of 9 or 10.
Post by m***@yahoo.co.uk
5. Alain Prost became as a key driver - who (brilliant though he was of course) proved that winning races and titles without taking too many risks was at least as good an overall strategy (if not better) than trying to win them by taking lots of risks. Compare with Juan Pablo Montoya in F1 - is the final corner at Hockenheim named after him? It should be since he crashed there that often through overdoing it - even on the parade lap once. And Button v Hamilton at McLaren - say no more. Bits of that Spa polystyrene sign from Hamilton's collision with Kobayashi have yet to land. So another haul of points for you there Jenson - who always acknowledged Alain as his inspiration of course. Risk taking should pay if you want exiting racing - and it doesn't.
Stewart was the predecessor of Prost. Both men could be very fast, but neither saw the point in driving faster than you had to. There must have been earlier examples, and it has long been the case that to finish first, first you must finish.

Then came Lauda, who was also fast but also would play the percentage game. Again, increasing reliability and the greater dominance of a car increased this effect. In 1993 Prost could play the game of driving just fast enough because his car would finish most of the time, and when it finished it would be high up in the field.

IMO semi-auto boxes and more reliable chassis were big factors, and made a sure-but-safe approach a more attractive proposition.
Post by m***@yahoo.co.uk
6. The TV companies actually covering it eventually started saying it was boring themselves during it - Ratner II.
Loading...