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.
@antipodean 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 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
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
@antipodean 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 said in Formula 1:
@antipodean 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.
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
@antipodean 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 said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
@antipodean 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
@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.
-
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
-
-
@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.
As an aside, I wasn't aware that some drivers even have to pay for their own super licence, which is cheap enough if you're shit, but Max would be up for euro1.2M (Red Bull pay his). Crazy system based on championship points.
@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 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.
@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 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,
@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.
-
@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.
@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.
-
@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,
@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).
-
-
-
@Billy-Tell said in Formula 1:
Finally!
Thrilled for him and his family. He gets to realise a childhood dream
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
From the Motorsport article next to the one linked
The announcement only confirmed Lawson for the remaining six grands prix of the current season, with no word on a drive in 2025 as Red Bull is keen to keep its options open within its driver line-ups across both squads..
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
I think is just his original contact which goes until 2025.
“ Lawson’s current contract with Red Bull contains a clause that he is free to leave, should he not be guaranteed a place on the 2025 grid by a certain date.”
He still isn’t guaranteed a place. Nobody is really!
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
Sauce. Could be wrong but it's close. I might have misunderstood though, but I thought he's pretty much locked in to drive next season for one of the RB teams
