2015 Canadian Grand Prix thread

[truefan72]

Delighted to see Massa out. Serves him right for his double standard Verstappen comments.

that we can agree on

[truefan72]

Wow, either something didn't work on Rosberg's car or he's been a really sore loser. That "garbage" quote was harsh.

I stand corrected lol.

[N4D13]

I wonder if some of those folks who criticized hamilton for being grumpy after the monaco race will now chastise rosberg for his grumpiness after qualy.
My guess....crickets

Anyway, it was a decent qualy and i am hoping that the 2 lotus score some very high points tomorrow.
My FGP certainly would need them

Great timing!

[Tazio]

Missed quali, looks like it was very tight between 10-14?!

[Nitrodaze]

Just for the record Marciano and Ali were in different eras, as was Tyson. In the USA in order to see "The Rumble in the Jungle" (Ali vs Foreman 1974) you had to go to a theatre or arena to watch it on closed circuit TV (before cable). I saw it live at the San Diego Sports Arena, for about $10 a seat. But since than it has become much more expensive. In the early 60s the fighters all fought 3 times a year, even the heavyweights, so you had a good idea of how they stacked up against each other. However Boxing is a different kettle of fish than auto racing, and I think it is not an appropriate comparison.

I hear you, but Rumble in the jungle is not representative of the situation either. The technology of the time and the telecommunication challenge of televising the fight was somewhat particular. It was a model that is akin more to pay per view than your normal fights of the time.
At the end of the day it is about the show, be it an individual event or a team event as in F1. Accessibility of the show to the masses is important to the wider appeal of the achievement of the cream of the sport that are the champions. My point is, when the show moves into an exclusive accessibility situation, exposed to a few, it loses it wider appeal and as a result respect falls as a consequence. The broader recognition of the cream of the sport as in boxing is quite dramatically reduced. The broader interest drops as a consequence as well.

A larger number of people across the globe can name most of the drivers in the current season. Not alot of people can tell you of the boxers in recent time. Which is sad as the social banter of boxing has moved on to other sports; football, baseball car racing etc everything other than boxing.

[Tazio]

I hear you, but Rumble in the jungle is not representative of the situation either. The technology of the time and the telecommunication challenge of televising the fight was somewhat particular. It was a model that is akin more to pay per view than your normal fights of the time.
At the end of the day it is about the show, be it an individual event or a team event as in F1. Accessibility of the show to the masses is important to the wider appeal of the achievement of the cream of the sport that are the champions. My point is, when the show moves into an exclusive accessibility situation, exposed to a few, it loses it wider appeal and as a result respect falls as a consequence. The broader recognition of the cream of the sport as in boxing is quite dramatically reduced. The broader interest drops as a consequence as well.

A larger number of people across the globe can name most of the drivers in the current season. Not alot of people can tell you of the boxers in recent time. Which is sad as the social banter of boxing has moved on to other sports; football, baseball car racing etc everything other than boxing.

Well yes it is sad, but Boxing has quite a bit of competition in pugilism (UFC and the like), and really is another sport imo, with events that are made for pay TV. On F1 there has never ever been anything close to all races being broadcast free, and live in the USA. It was easier to watch when SpeedTV broadcasted it, as they would broadcast all practices, quali, and the races. Since it has gone to NBC the coverage is much worse than it was with Speed with many more commercials

[truefan72]

back in the day before the interwebs were good, i was forced to watch on speed.
I enjoyed the coverage somewhat as i thought the crew were very entertaining.
I liked the fact that they at least showed FP2 and qualy.
But as soon as fox bought speed, the commercials during the races were too long and too often we would come back from a commercial and something important had happened.
I remember when ABC introduced side by side and always wondered why Speed never went that route.
Then the channel decided to go all nascar all the time and moved some of the best races to fox which never bothered with pre-race build up and couldn't even bother to show post race stuff either.

then there was NBC sports that promised more coverage and better viewing. And failed on all fronts.
I watch all my races online, either with sky sports or viasat( and my app commentary)
I've given up on the american broadcast.

[Nitrodaze]

back in the day before the interwebs were good, i was forced to watch on speed.
I enjoyed the coverage somewhat as i thought the crew were very entertaining.
I liked the fact that they at least showed FP2 and qualy.
But as soon as fox bought speed, the commercials during the races were too long and too often we would come back from a commercial and something important had happened.
I remember when ABC introduced side by side and always wondered why Speed never went that route.
Then the channel decided to go all nascar all the time and moved some of the best races to fox which never bothered with pre-race build up and couldn't even bother to show post race stuff either.

then there was NBC sports that promised more coverage and better viewing. And failed on all fronts.
I watch all my races online, either with sky sports or viasat( and my app commentary)
I've given up on the american broadcast.

In recent times it has become too expensive for terrestial tv broadcasters to air F1. This is evident across the globe as the quality of the F1 broadcast has dropped dramatically. I have to say that the BBC is doing a great job of making the most of a bad situation. The one hour highlights appear to be contractual rather than broadcasters being nonchalant about it.
Even web broadcastIng is somewhat curtailed by the contract, thankfully it appears not to have affected live radio broadcasts.
I am not sure where the problem is stemming from, but l think co-operation between incumbent TV stations could go a long way to solving this problem. Pay per view channels like sky offer a great coverage of all aspects of the race but not everyone can afford it.

[Mia 01]

So far, so good!

[Nitrodaze]

With these talks about poor coverage, expensive tickets, future of F1 and related topics such as spicing up the show with refulling. And gross discontent of the smaller teams as they struggle financially year in year out. I think it is a good time to take stock of the presidency of the current FIA president.
Six years on, what is you view of this term of presidency? Some of the observations picked are as follows:-

1. Some think the style of the presidency seem to lean towards an elitist approach where only the big teams have a say in anything.
2. The chatter is that the financial issue stems from the F1 rights holder but not helped by the elitist style of the presidency and the not so warm relationship between the FIA president and Ecclestone. A better relationship could well have influenced a better deal for smaller teams.
3. The car designs have been over regulated and has not helped reduce cost as was the main objective. Smaller teams are still financially curtailed from achieving a competitive car at low budgets. And bigger teams are driven to spend more to attain small gains in performance.
4. Looking at the plight of the Manor team over last year and their very courageous and impressive effort to keep their place in F1. And watching the Haas team preparing to enter F1, it is apparent that it is as difficult as ever for new teams to enter F1. And the playing field is financially tenuous at best for these new team to survive up to and past 3 years.
5. The driver are like machine operators rather than racers as they drive within parameters set by regulation.
6. The single tyre provider model and the marginal tyre approach has not helped the cost saving objective. Marginal tyres have introduce some level of excitement. But at the price of a somewhat conservation racing; of Tyre preservation.
7. The artificial gizmos like Energy Recovery System and DRS have they contributed to the the excitement of racing and a great idea but what do you think in relation to cost? I like these Hybrid cars in modern F1.
8. The smaller engine seem to have worked and the objective of reducing fuel consumption seem evident and a great achievement by the FIA. Some complain about the lower noise of the engine, l personally can get use to it being slightly quieter. A small price to pay for cost saving l think.
9. Some say the car has become too easy to drive, other say it has become too safe. I have mixed feelings about these aspects, particularly the safety aspect. Alot of work has gone into ensuring that drivers are able to walk away from the sort of crash that Vesterpen had at Monaco. It would be unwise to undo it.

What are your views?