Formula 1

antipodean

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

How many of them have shown they're competitive in F2?

None. They don't compete in F2.

That's my point. It's stretching the realms of credibility to say because they've got some success in lesser series they'd be good F1 drivers. But there's evidence the opposite is true, like Ericson, Nasr, Palou. None of them won a F2 championship.

But look at the guys who did; Hamilton, Rosberg, Russell, Leclerc...

Snowy

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

How many of them have shown they're competitive in F2?

None. They don't compete in F2.

That's my point. It's stretching the realms of credibility to say because they've got some success in lesser series they'd be good F1 drivers. But there's evidence the opposite is true, like Ericson, Nasr, Palou. None of them won a F2 championship.

But look at the guys who did; Hamilton, Rosberg, Russell, Leclerc...

They aren't in "lesser series", they are different formulas. They don't necessarily get opportunities in F2 even. It's largely a Euro comp with a trip to the middle east and Oz. Most of the guys I mentioned are from other parts of the world. Even Lawson went via Japan (supposedly the formula closest to F1 but that came from the TV).

antipodean

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

How many of them have shown they're competitive in F2?

None. They don't compete in F2.

That's my point. It's stretching the realms of credibility to say because they've got some success in lesser series they'd be good F1 drivers. But there's evidence the opposite is true, like Ericson, Nasr, Palou. None of them won a F2 championship.

But look at the guys who did; Hamilton, Rosberg, Russell, Leclerc...

They aren't in "lesser series", they are different formulas.

Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.

edit - just look at the differences between Indycar and F1.

Snowy

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.

I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.

antipodean

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.

I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.

Agreed they're different. The difference is they're slower and require less talent.

canefan

Announcement tomorrow 🤫

Machpants

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.

I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.

Agreed they're different. The difference is they're slower and require less talent.

That's bollaux. They're both driving, yes but very different. Rally the track is continuously changing (you don't do circuits) and the opposition drivers are no influence. So there's a lot of reactive skills there. F1 the track doesn't change and is all about nailing the absolute perfect line, whilst dealing with other drivers. You can usefully practice F1 on a PC, rally not much at all, some sim racers have done very well in the real thing on tracks. Just cos it's faster didn't mean more skill, I can say that as someone who has flown low level at 1000kph and also in a heli slower, but much lower

antipodean

@Machpants said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.

I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.

Agreed they're different. The difference is they're slower and require less talent.

That's bollaux. They're both driving, yes but very different. Rally the track is continuously changing (you don't do circuits) and the opposition drivers are no influence. So there's a lot of reactive skills there. F1 the track doesn't change and is all about nailing the absolute perfect line, whilst dealing with other drivers. You can usefully practice F1 on a PC, rally not much at all, some sum racers have done very well in the real thing on tracks. Just cos it's faster didn't mean more skill, I can say that as someone who has flown low level at 1000kph and also in a heli slower, but much lower

You might want to reread what I wrote.

Machpants

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Machpants said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.

I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.

Agreed they're different. The difference is they're slower and require less talent.

That's bollaux. They're both driving, yes but very different. Rally the track is continuously changing (you don't do circuits) and the opposition drivers are no influence. So there's a lot of reactive skills there. F1 the track doesn't change and is all about nailing the absolute perfect line, whilst dealing with other drivers. You can usefully practice F1 on a PC, rally not much at all, some sum racers have done very well in the real thing on tracks. Just cos it's faster didn't mean more skill, I can say that as someone who has flown low level at 1000kph and also in a heli slower, but much lower

You might want to reread what I wrote.

That's like reading an article, not the done thing.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post

antipodean

@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.

But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.

voodoo

Speed plus proximity to the other cars I reckon. Knowing where your edges are at that speed with everyone having that level manoeuvrability as well as straight-line speed makes the decision making just incredible

Edit - said with absolute zero driving ability of his own

canefan

There is a large element of bravery. Schumacher was so good because he broke so much later than everyone else. And if you get things wrong there is a significant element of danger to person. It is physically demanding as well, the G forces must be crazy

MajorPom

@Snowy said in Formula 1:

@MajorRage said in Formula 1:

Honestly, I think racing is probably like Golf, in that the top top drivers are all much of a much ness, with the mentality being the difference between the elite and the next tier.

I'd agree with that. F1 has "some" of the top drivers around, but some who aren't as well and the disparity shows at times, which is a shame for the sport as a genuine contest across the field would improve it, but as you say we have already discussed it. Seeing two top drivers in the same team is great (with McLaren at the moment for example).

Would love to see some guys from other fields occasionally. Kyle Larson is incredibly talented but we'll never see him in F1. Dixon is behind only Foyt in Indycar titles now, but turned down F1 because he basically didn't trust the politics to get a drive, and wasn't prepared to play the waiting game that Lawson is having to play. Would be interesting to see Palou go as he was being chased I believe. He would be a good "cross code" comparator. With McLaren in Indy now (and getting more competitive) there might be a cross over driver with O'Ward, for example. McLaughlin was almost instantly successful going from a supercar to Indy, hugely different, but he managed it, even on ovals, very quickly. SVG went from supercars to Nascar and won straight away as well. Incredibly talented.

The crux of all that is that we don't get to see these guys get a crack in F1 because they don't get the opportunity, they are more than likely good enough though. Hopefully Andretti get a place at the table so at least another couple of seats.

Impossible to know just how good any of them are even in the same formula really, given that some teams produce superior cars within the formula itself, but I'd love to see some guys fill seats in F1 that were there on raw talent and not funding / nepotism/ politics, etc. Anyway, my dreams don't count for much anywhere, let alone F1.

I disagree. Every single f1 team will have stats on every driver in every competition on the planet. Everybody knows the single biggest differentiator is the driver. Data scientists in these guys alone will be deep into double figures for every team.

A good example is Craig Lowndes.

Dominated super cars, went to Europe, got a seat beside Montoya in the same car. Then failed whilst Montoya went on.

I get your overall point, which I agree, but I would suggest that very few, if any, drivers don’t get an f1 shot if they really are up to it.

Machpants

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.

But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.

I still disagree, F1 and similar races are very formulaic. It's about repetitive exactness, not necessarily driving skill. However you define that, being great at F1 does not mean you're better, just different,

antipodean

@Machpants said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.

But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.

I still disagree, F1 and similar races are very formulaic. It's about repetitive exactness, not necessarily driving skill. However you define that, being great at F1 does not mean you're better, just different,

I can promise you that driving a vehicle capable of that sort of speed is categorically not about repetitive exactness as every lap means different levels of traction from the track and from your tyres, lowering fuel levels, aerodynamic efficiency depending on how close you are to the car in front.

Driving quickly competitively is about judging, feeling and responding to being on the very limit of traction.

antipodean

@MajorRage said in Formula 1:

A good example is Craig Lowndes.

Dominated super cars, went to Europe, got a seat beside Montoya in the same car. Then failed whilst Montoya went on.

And Nick Heidfeld. Both Montoya and Heidfeld made it into F1. All three of them from the same cars in Helmut Marko's team - the same Marko now in RBR.

Lowndes simply wasn't competitive.

Dodge

@Machpants said in Formula 1:

@antipodean said in Formula 1:

@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.

But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.

I still disagree, F1 and similar races are very formulaic. It's about repetitive exactness, not necessarily driving skill. However you define that, being great at F1 does not mean you're better, just different,

this flies in the face of what I've been told by a pro racing driver friend of mine who raced against Jenson Button and Kimi R growing up in karting etc. He said, without question, the only person he's ever been on a track with who he just knew was faster, was Kimi, his feel for the braking point, the management of traction etc was just better.

F1 has always been a mixture of the very best and the very richest who can buy their way to a seat, sometimes not for very long. But as mentioned above, the guys that win multiple championships and a proportion of the grid beyond them are unquestionably the best drivers in the world in any format (excepting rallying as above).