F1...

[sendmyusername]

Re: webbers luck, is it not that he's too hard on the car ?
It can't be blamed on his driving for all of it, but if he's a little bit more 'staby' on the brakes, a little heavier with the foot, and not quite getting the car set up 100% so he has to fight it more. Is that not possibly what is causing some of his mechanical problems ?
I remember reading about mansell being very aggressive with the car, to the point his (relative) hamfistedness caused car failures.
Maybe vettle is more composed and smoother.
I know vettle will be getting all the new bits first, but at some point he'll have been running around with the bits webber has.
Plus from a constructers point of view, it would be suicide to deliberately not maintain both cars equally.

[Dominic]

Hamilton says Vettel's dominance is getting boring for the fans; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/24428367

I have to confess, I am getting a little bored of it. Doubt I'll stop watching any time soon, but I'm becoming less enthused by it. Anyone else feeling the same?

[Scotty C]

Hamilton says Vettel's dominance is getting boring for the fans; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/24428367

I have to confess, I am getting a little bored of it. Doubt I'll stop watching any time soon, but I'm becoming less enthused by it. Anyone else feeling the same?

I have stopped watching it and lost interest.

[BiggestNizzy]

I have stopped watching it, it's boring.

Hamilton however should stop moaning to the press and start giving his team grief for producing a sh*t car.

[David]

If I miss one then it's not a big deal anymore Not sure that Suzi Perry's transfer to F1 has been a success either. The commentary team seems to have lost a bit of focus now Jake’s fanatical attention to detail has gone. The features seem to have suffered a budget bashing too. Shame

[Shug]

I've not watched the BBC coverage since Sky started - after a rocky start, they've all settled in well (as long as Lazerboy remembers to try and keep his trap shut in interviews) I've not actually seen Perry, but she was excellent with MotoGP - perhaps her heart really isn't in the cars.

The series has suffered from a combination of RB's blank chequebook + Newey, Vettel's unarguable skill and desire to be fastest everywhere and every time he goes out, plus the rest of the teams regularly dropping the ball when RB rarely seem to do so at the moment. Kind of a perfect storm that's difficult to see a way out of - unless Newey drops a bollock with the new rules (not something he traditionally does)

[Lazydonkey]

Worry for me is how much the teams are going to spend developing the 2014 cars when the rules change for 2015.

I've written off 2013, but im not sure 2014 is going to see a dramatic change in people's fortunes.

[jason]

I still watch, but I certainly don't get excited any more.

Not just due to Vettel/Red Bull dominance, but also cos I just cannot stand this 'of the cliff' Pirelli tyres business (quite different to how tyres wore in the free choice era of, say, the 80s), in combo with mission control room strategists taking all the human/driver element out of on-track action. Apart from the last few laps for minor placings (it was good watching Hulkenberg hang on in the scrap for 4th), the racing is not dissimilar to the 'time trial/stopwatch' refuelling era late 90s/early 00s.

The most disappointing detail for 2014 is Vettel having an unproven team mate. If Red Bull's car is dominant again, then Vettel will waltz to title no 5. When a car is so dominant we need an inter-team battle to keep it interesting, like '84, '87, '88, '96 etc. All seasons where one car dominated, but also all seasons that were still engaging battles.

[tut]

The tyre situation is ludicrous. An F1 car can not be driven flat out through the race as it should be, but has to nurse its tyres because a committee decided that they could cut the cost that way.

It does not matter what they do, the teams with the most money will be contesting the top places and that can not be reversed. That means at least £200 million per year, probably even more for some teams

As for green F1, bloody farcical. If they want that then put a restriction on the hospitality units, the size of a hotel and using enough electricity to feed a small town.

tut

[j2 lot]

My interest has dropped in the last couple of years. Went to a race every year for 15 years - but havent had the enthusiasm to spend on it for the last 2 years. Keep planning on doing it but never seem to get around to it.
Also havent bothered getting up for the early morning races and have just caught the highlights.
For me it is the constant stewards meddling and penalties being applied and the chocolate tyres mean the racing has lost its edge, its more of a marathon now than a sprint

[ryallm]

Vettel's dominance has indeed become pretty tedious but there is still plenty of great racing behind. Some of the overtaking in Korea was fantastic - in fact there has been more actual racing between cars on track on the last couple of seasons than I can remember in years. Proper balls out circuit this weekend at Suzuka - should be good. 'Mon the Iceman

[jason]

The tyre situation is ludicrous. An F1 car can not be driven flat out through the race as it should be, but has to nurse its tyres because a committee decided that they could cut the cost that way.

In essence this his not dissimilar to some previous eras, Tut. eg. in the 80s drivers could elect to try to run the distance on hards, or be aggressive on softer knowing they'd have to pit (drivers were free, of course, to actually mix compound choices on each corner). But the difference was there was a choice to stop, and no 'cliff' where the tyres would suddenly scream enough and ruin the driver's race. It was a progressive thing.

Whist not liking Pirelli's artificial creation, I'm actually all for the cars not being driven blindly flat out lights-to-flag - this was all that was bad about the early 00s for me and not 'Grand Prix' racing. It's what I refer to as 'stopwatch' racing when tied-in with refuelling as it was then. I preferred racing where different drivers' approaches yielded outcomes (eg. Lauda vs Prost in '84).

Sadly, flat out now would probably mean even more extreme Red Bull dominance.

[Scuffers]

The tyre situation is ludicrous. An F1 car can not be driven flat out through the race as it should be, but has to nurse its tyres because a committee decided that they could cut the cost that way.

In essence this his not dissimilar to some previous eras, Tut. eg. in the 80s drivers could elect to try to run the distance on hards, or be aggressive on softer knowing they'd have to pit (drivers were free, of course, to actually mix compound choices on each corner). But the difference was there was a choice to stop, and no 'cliff' where the tyres would suddenly scream enough and ruin the driver's race. It was a progressive thing.

Whist not liking Pirelli's artificial creation, I'm actually all for the cars not being driven blindly flat out lights-to-flag - this was all that was bad about the early 00s for me and not 'Grand Prix' racing. It's what I refer to as 'stopwatch' racing when tied-in with refuelling as it was then. I preferred racing where different drivers' approaches yielded outcomes (eg. Lauda vs Prost in '84).

Sadly, flat out now would probably mean even more extreme Red Bull dominance.

there's a difference between tyres wearing out and falling apart.

[tut]

So far they have come up with reasons for the tyre failures ranging from drivers driving over the kerbs, driving too aggressively, driving over debris, trying to win, and lord knows what else.

tut

[jason]

The tyre situation is ludicrous. An F1 car can not be driven flat out through the race as it should be, but has to nurse its tyres because a committee decided that they could cut the cost that way.

In essence this his not dissimilar to some previous eras, Tut. eg. in the 80s drivers could elect to try to run the distance on hards, or be aggressive on softer knowing they'd have to pit (drivers were free, of course, to actually mix compound choices on each corner). But the difference was there was a choice to stop, and no 'cliff' where the tyres would suddenly scream enough and ruin the driver's race. It was a progressive thing.

Whist not liking Pirelli's artificial creation, I'm actually all for the cars not being driven blindly flat out lights-to-flag - this was all that was bad about the early 00s for me and not 'Grand Prix' racing. It's what I refer to as 'stopwatch' racing when tied-in with refuelling as it was then. I preferred racing where different drivers' approaches yielded outcomes (eg. Lauda vs Prost in '84).

Sadly, flat out now would probably mean even more extreme Red Bull dominance.

there's a difference between tyres wearing out and falling apart.

Indeed. I think that's exactly my point