Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by AC » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 19:01:25


Quote:



>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe
>>> should be
>>> solely  the Team Champiuonship.

>> Well, Im gonna trot out my usual: F1 is a team sport.

>> Which is why I 100% support team orders, no matter what they are, as
>> long as they are "legal" and safe. The Piquet incident being a prime
>> example of illegal.

>> The problem for people like me is that most F1 fans identify with
>> drivers, so the driver championship has primacy.

> Yes, but drivers are replaceable/interchangeable, the team endures (if
> its good enough).

Indeed.

However, that raises an interesting question or point. If we see it as a
hierarchy with teams above drivers, then the sport its self must be
above the teams, right? So, if it is right for teams to have team orders
for team benefit reasons, then why is it wrong for the sport to also do
so, or arrange things for its over all good? So, I'm thinking the
favouring of Ferrari, and frankly other teams to a lesser extent.

And where do fans sit in this hierarchy? Above the sport, or beneath the
drivers?

--
AC

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by AC » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 19:03:56

Quote:




>>> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented competition,
>>> and

>>> by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered as such, I propose

>>> let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up something else.



>>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe
>>>> should

>>>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

>> Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship, otherwise
>> they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been primarily a
>> technological contest, to see what constructor can create the fastest car
>> within the limitations of a "formula".

> Matter of perspective, I'd say. For instance, for the first eight years of
> F1 WCC wasn't even there. Nonexisting quality. And for many years afterwards
> it was clear for the team owners and managers they pull their recognition
> and money mostly through what drivers achive on the track. It did not
> diminish importance of the team work and technological breakthroughs. Just,
> priorities were set in diferent order and drivers were much more important
> then today. For me F1 without healthy balance of driver-car equation is not
> F1 at all. And that balance went on the technological side too many years
> ago. In fact I would not be surprised tpo see one day F1UAV with drivers
> sitting in the box.

Isnt this what whacky tyres are supposed to address? They give the
driver some way to out skill the other drivers.

--
AC

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by Bruce Houl » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 19:58:41

Quote:



> >> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented competition, and

> >> by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered as such, I propose

> >> let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up something else.



> >>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe should

> >>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

> > Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship, otherwise they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been primarily a technological contest, to see what constructor can create the fastest car within the limitations of a "formula".

> > A good enough constructor can win using any competent driver (see: Brawn in 2009

> Oi, steady on there!!!!!

> > ). It's only when constructors have found no real advantage that drivers matter.

> > It's the same in Americas Cup yachting. It's a tech race and the fact that you may know names such as Dennis Conner or Chris***son is incidental.

> > Speaking of which, this year's boats are looking ***ING SCARY if you haven't seen them.

> > http://SportToday.org/

> Wow. That is incredible. The bloke at the end makes the scary point.

> Imagine one of those foils failing at top speed.

Not only that. They're going a lot slower than F1 cars, but when racing they can be on opposite tacks and in a close race pass just ahead of or behind the other boat with a closing speed possibly in the vicinity of 100 mph!

Or even just a simple capsize at full speed.

These practice boats are a fraction of the size and weight and speed and don't do the foiling:

http://SportToday.org/

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by Sir Ti » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:00:56


Quote:
> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe should be
> solely  the Team Championship.

Firstly, as long as there are teams there will be teams orders (whether
covert or acknowledged); they are as old as motor racing itself.

Secondly, GP racing has always been a balance between engineering
excellence and driver ability. Nevertheless, a really outstanding driver
has usually been able to make a crucial difference: Nuvolari in an
outdated Alfa was able to humble the might of Mercedes and Auto Union in
the 1930s, Moss, in a privately-entered Lotus, famously beat the 3-car
Ferrari team at Monaco in 1961.

I get the impression that some F1 engineers would be happy to do without
the annoyance of having to have a driver at all and some fans are more
interested in comparing different teams' approach to coanda exhaust
systems (say) than the personalities of the drivers but I think that for
most fans, especially the many casual fans, it is the rivalry between
*drivers* that is the main interest - hence the many thousands of words
that have been written about the Seb-Web affair.

Obviously it is down to each individual to enjoy F1 in his own way but
for me the driver, even if he is just part of a team, will always be the
most interesting element.
--
Henry Birkin, Bt.

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by WrongWayWad » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 00:57:42

Quote:


>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe
>> should be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

> Well, Im gonna trot out my usual: F1 is a team sport.

> Which is why I 100% support team orders, no matter what they are, as
> long as they are "legal" and safe. The Piquet incident being a prime
> example of illegal.

> The problem for people like me is that most F1 fans identify with
> drivers, so the driver championship has primacy. And to be honest, I
> get all e***d by the WDC too. Im not saying that the WDC is
> unimportant or irrelevant.

> So, there is a duality there. But I say the team comes first, so team
> orders make perfect sense to me.

> Funny though, no one seems bother by the team aspect in cycling, while
> one rider get to win.

The physics of cycling almost forces this strategy, and a large group always
rides faster and with less effort than an individual, (by a large margin).
You keep the team together for 99% of the race and 'launch' the fastest
sprinter at the end (at least on 'flat' courses).  Going up large mountains
the pack advantage that comes from the aerodynamics is greatly reduced so
you do see a lot more racers going alone.
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by Noj » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:36:01

AC wrote ...

Quote:


> > AC wrote ...


> >>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe should be
> >>> solely  the Team Champiuonship.

> >> Well, Im gonna trot out my usual: F1 is a team sport.

> >> Which is why I 100% support team orders, no matter what they are, as
> >> long as they are "legal" and safe. The Piquet incident being a prime
> >> example of illegal.

> >> The problem for people like me is that most F1 fans identify with
> >> drivers, so the driver championship has primacy. And to be honest, I get
> >> all e***d by the WDC too. Im not saying that the WDC is unimportant or
> >> irrelevant.

> >> So, there is a duality there. But I say the team comes first, so team
> >> orders make perfect sense to me.

> >> Funny though, no one seems bother by the team aspect in cycling, while
> >> one rider get to win.

> > A cyclist has to prove he's better than his team mates to become the
> > designated No 1.  Each race or stage might have a different No 1
> > depending upon the coarse.  Teams like Sky are running 3 race teams, so
> > they have 3 or more No 1's.  This year they have 3 top riders.

> Same with F1. Might be less formal, but I dont recall a less able driver
> being given No1 status over a clearly more talented driver.

Brawn with JB and RB.  At the beginning of that season RB had more wins
to his name and he set the car up.  
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by WrongWayWad » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 02:24:11

Quote:



>>> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented
>>> competition, and by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered
>>> as such, I
>>> propose let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up
>>> something


>>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe
>>>> should

>>>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

>> Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship,
>> otherwise they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been
>> primarily a technological contest, to see what constructor can
>> create the fastest car within the limitations of a "formula".   A good
>> enough constructor can win using any competent driver (see:
>> Brawn in 2009

> Oi, steady on there!!!!!

>> ). It's only when constructors have found no real advantage that
>> drivers matter. It's the same in Americas Cup yachting. It's a tech race
>> and the
>> fact that you may know names such as Dennis Conner or Chris***son
>> is incidental.  Speaking of which, this year's boats are looking ***ING
>> SCARY if
>> you haven't seen them. http://SportToday.org/

> Wow. That is incredible. The bloke at the end makes the scary point.
> Imagine one of those foils failing at top speed.

Terrifying that they can get the entire weight and force on the boat
effectively driven through that one foil, (the rudders are just for
steering).  Now THAT'S carbon fiber earning its keep.
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by AC » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 03:31:09

Quote:




>>>> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented competition, and

>>>> by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered as such, I propose

>>>> let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up something else.



>>>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe should

>>>>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

>>> Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship, otherwise they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been primarily a technological contest, to see what constructor can create the fastest car within the limitations of a "formula".

>>> A good enough constructor can win using any competent driver (see: Brawn in 2009

>> Oi, steady on there!!!!!

>>> ). It's only when constructors have found no real advantage that drivers matter.

>>> It's the same in Americas Cup yachting. It's a tech race and the fact that you may know names such as Dennis Conner or Chris***son is incidental.

>>> Speaking of which, this year's boats are looking ***ING SCARY if you haven't seen them.

>>> http://SportToday.org/

>> Wow. That is incredible. The bloke at the end makes the scary point.

>> Imagine one of those foils failing at top speed.

> Not only that. They're going a lot slower than F1 cars, but when racing they can be on opposite tacks and in a close race pass just ahead of or behind the other boat with a closing speed possibly in the vicinity of 100 mph!

> Or even just a simple capsize at full speed.

> These practice boats are a fraction of the size and weight and speed and don't do the foiling:

> http://SportToday.org/

Yeah, a Laser is about my limit. I think I'll leave those things to the
nut jobs!!! Mind you, the feeling onboard at high speed must be totally
incredible. I mean, mere Laser at full pelt is brilliant fun. These
things must literally blow you away.

(Should point out that my sailing experience is about 25 years old now,
I'd probably die if I tried to sail now)

Those sails. The look rigid or semi rigid. Are they?

--
AC

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by Bruce Houl » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 06:31:31

Quote:





> >>>> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented competition, and

> >>>> by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered as such, I propose

> >>>> let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up something else.



> >>>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe should

> >>>>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

> >>> Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship, otherwise they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been primarily a technological contest, to see what constructor can create the fastest car within the limitations of a "formula".

> >>> A good enough constructor can win using any competent driver (see: Brawn in 2009

> >> Oi, steady on there!!!!!

> >>> ). It's only when constructors have found no real advantage that drivers matter.

> >>> It's the same in Americas Cup yachting. It's a tech race and the fact that you may know names such as Dennis Conner or Chris***son is incidental.

> >>> Speaking of which, this year's boats are looking ***ING SCARY if you haven't seen them.

> >>> http://SportToday.org/

> >> Wow. That is incredible. The bloke at the end makes the scary point.

> >> Imagine one of those foils failing at top speed.

> > Not only that. They're going a lot slower than F1 cars, but when racing they can be on opposite tacks and in a close race pass just ahead of or behind the other boat with a closing speed possibly in the vicinity of 100 mph!

> > Or even just a simple capsize at full speed.

> > These practice boats are a fraction of the size and weight and speed and don't do the foiling:

> > http://SportToday.org/

> Yeah, a Laser is about my limit. I think I'll leave those things to the

> nut jobs!!! Mind you, the feeling onboard at high speed must be totally

> incredible. I mean, mere Laser at full pelt is brilliant fun. These

> things must literally blow you away.

> (Should point out that my sailing experience is about 25 years old now,

> I'd probably die if I tried to sail now)

Yeah, I technically still own a Laser that I was sailing in the mid to late 80s. My brother's kids use it now. I really should make them buy it...
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by Bobste » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 12:38:24


Quote:
> Nitpick - it was still only worth 8, BUT drivers did get a point for
> fastest lap, so potentially they could get 9. OTOH some races were
> hand-timed to the nearest second only, so several drivers could, and
> did share that point.

Ah. I just looked at a race report and saw Moss, who won, got 9
points. He must have got fastest lap too.
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by Paul Giveri » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 22:48:14


Quote:

>Those sails. The look rigid or semi rigid. Are they?

Adrian Newey designed them so it depends on how you test them ;)

--
Paul Giverin

My Photos:- www.giverin.co.uk

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by News » Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:05:28


Quote:

>> Those sails. The look rigid or semi rigid. Are they?

> Adrian Newey designed them so it depends on how you test them ;)

Ain't that the truth...
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by John » Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:19:35

Will the FIA give a rip?  Nope.
 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by keith » Mon, 01 Apr 2013 21:57:04


Quote:



>>>> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented competition, and

>>>> by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered as such, I propose

>>>> let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up something else.



>>>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ?  Maybe should

>>>>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

>>> Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship, otherwise they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been primarily a technological contest, to see what constructor can create the fastest car within the limitations of a "formula".

>>> A good enough constructor can win using any competent driver (see: Brawn in 2009

>> Oi, steady on there!!!!!

>>> ). It's only when constructors have found no real advantage that drivers matter.

>>> It's the same in Americas Cup yachting. It's a tech race and the fact that you may know names such as Dennis Conner or Chris***son is incidental.

>>> Speaking of which, this year's boats are looking ***ING SCARY if you haven't seen them.

>>> http://SportToday.org/

>> Wow. That is incredible. The bloke at the end makes the scary point.

>> Imagine one of those foils failing at top speed.

> Not only that. They're going a lot slower than F1 cars, but when racing they can be on opposite tacks and in a close race pass just ahead of or behind the other boat with a closing speed possibly in the vicinity of 100 mph!

> Or even just a simple capsize at full speed.

> These practice boats are a fraction of the size and weight and speed and don't do the foiling:

> http://SportToday.org/

I note the crash helmets which are fair enough, if that thing
pitchpoled, the crew would land half a kilometre away.

Oracle has actually capsized in a practice run

http://SportToday.org/

 
 
 

Given that there are 'Team Orders' ....

Post by WrongWayWad » Wed, 03 Apr 2013 03:21:37

Quote:





>>>>> Agreed! But since formula1 was initially drivers oriented
>>>>> competition, and

>>>>> by majority of the fans is I beleive still considered as such, I
>>>>> propose

>>>>> let's abolish the name formula1 itself too, and make up something
>>>>> else.



>>>>>> .....  is there any meaning to the Drivers' Championship ? Maybe
>>>>>> should

>>>>>> be solely  the Team Champiuonship.

>>>> Formula 1 has never been primarily a Driver's Championship,
>>>> otherwise they'd all be driving the same cars. It's always been
>>>> primarily a technological contest, to see what constructor can
>>>> create the fastest car within the limitations of a "formula".

>>>> A good enough constructor can win using any competent driver (see:
>>>> Brawn in 2009

>>> Oi, steady on there!!!!!

>>>> ). It's only when constructors have found no real advantage that
>>>> drivers matter.

>>>> It's the same in Americas Cup yachting. It's a tech race and the
>>>> fact that you may know names such as Dennis Conner or Chris
>>>>***son is incidental.

>>>> Speaking of which, this year's boats are looking ***ING SCARY if
>>>> you haven't seen them.

>>>> http://SportToday.org/

>>> Wow. That is incredible. The bloke at the end makes the scary point.

>>> Imagine one of those foils failing at top speed.

>> Not only that. They're going a lot slower than F1 cars, but when
>> racing they can be on opposite tacks and in a close race pass just
>> ahead of or behind the other boat with a closing speed possibly in
>> the vicinity of 100 mph!   Or even just a simple capsize at full speed.

>> These practice boats are a fraction of the size and weight and speed
>> and don't do the foiling: http://SportToday.org/

> Yeah, a Laser is about my limit. I think I'll leave those things to
> the nut jobs!!! Mind you, the feeling onboard at high speed must be
> totally incredible. I mean, mere Laser at full pelt is brilliant fun.
> These things must literally blow you away.

> (Should point out that my sailing experience is about 25 years old
> now, I'd probably die if I tried to sail now)

> Those sails. The look rigid or semi rigid. Are they?

The mainsail is a 2-piece rigid wing (one long vertical joint).  The jibs
and spinnakers are conventional.