- cross-posted to:
- formula1@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- formula1@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
Hmmm 🤔 get rid of imola or or just make the car the right size. So hard to choose, so hard to choose.
The racing was terrible even when the cars were smaller.
This isn’t a difficult choice.
So then we should get rid of Spa, Austria, Baku, Zandvoort, and Monaco? Now I know some of these tracks are not everyone’s favorites, but it seems smaller cars would be easier. Plus smaller cars would make racing better at every circuit.
If you want to engineer every race to be the same sure. We tried that after Canada 2010, those early pirellis were something.
Okay… Not sure how you got that take from what I said…
You can’t just change the cars for the sake of one track, a track that has historically been difficult for racing.
Similar to how forcing Pirelli into high deg tyres, chasing the energy of Canada 2010 was not a good move.
Not similar at all.
First there is already a size regulation. Is that size regulation better for racing? Seeing that almost everyone says it makes passing hard regardless of track. I think it is safe to say no, it is a suboptimal size. Remember they used to be smaller, a lot smaller. So this would be like going back to before tire deg.
Second you’ll notice that I said
Plus smaller cars would make racing better at every circuit.
Clearly I’m not trying to change the cars for one track I’m not sure how you think I said that.
Lastly if you’re going to argue the Imola is too narrow and should go away. Then you have to argue about all the other tracks I listed because they are all narrower. The cars not fitting is not the tracks fault it is the cars fault.
If you want to argue lmola is bad for another reason that’s totally fine but if that’s true then why did you respond to a post about car size, instead of something else.
Lastly if you’re going to argue the Imola is too narrow and should go away.
Never said that.
What I am trying to get at, is that you can’t force every race to be the same. And trying to is just going to lead to disaster.
Shrinking the cars isn’t the silver bullet that’ll fix whatever issue people have, especially at a track like Imola. It doesn’t matter how big the cars are if they can only take one line through a corner.
🐧
deleted by creator
I think if they introduce a rotating calendar Imola would be an ideal track to have in the rotation. The racing usually isn’t great, but it’s not the worst, and it would still keep an iconic circuit in F1. Seems like a good compromise.
Hard disagree.
How can you disagree? Did we watch the same race?
I tolerate Monaco because it’s been a cornerstone track for F1 since the beginning and “less about the race, more about the spectacle” as they say. Imola doesn’t have the spectacle, and it doesn’t have a competitive race. The cars can only pass reliably on a single corner. They are too long to make it cleanly through the chicanes. Unless the cars shrink, I’d rather F1 not spend another weekend here.
Monaco is even worse.
I think 20 of the world’s best drivers should almost always equal good racing. Something must be wrong if that isn’t true. Change the tracks, the cars, the regulations, the expectations of fans… is this a controversial idea?
Because I get how current F1 can have bad races. It all makes sense when you think about the big picture. The closeness of margins, the tires, the dirty air, safety. But if you step back it starts to feel absurd. If we’re going to believe that these guys are the best then we have to believe that they’re being wasted.
Any series that has independent development and no BoP is going to be uncompetitive at the front. Someone is always going to either spend more money or find a trick that sets them apart from the rest of the field.
Adding a BoP would kill the sport as we know it, and restricting development even more would be bad as well. F1 is the last true open development series. The rest all died for similar reasons.
