2018 Australian Grand Prix

Magnussen and LeClerc were definitely the drivers of the day.

Haas, on the other hand... what a bunch of mfing boneheads. It was one thing to screw Kevin Magnussen out of an excellent result, but to then screw over Romain Grosjean not much later with the exact same mistake is the most ludicrous thing that has happened in motorsports this year. Shame, shame.
 
Truex_rox said:
Magnussen and LeClerc were definitely the drivers of the day.

Haas, on the other hand... what a bunch of mfing boneheads. It was one thing to screw Kevin Magnussen out of an excellent result, but to then screw over Romain Grosjean not much later with the exact same mistake is the most ludicrous thing that has happened in motorsports this year. Shame, shame.
Click to expand...

Well, it's still early, isn't it? I'm sure we will see plenty of ludicrous things in motorsports this year. Sometimes the ludicrousity is part of the entertainment!
 
Doc Austin said:
Well, it's still early, isn't it? I'm sure we will see plenty of ludicrous things in motorsports this year. Sometimes the ludicrousity is part of the entertainment!
Click to expand...
There will be plenty to laugh or scoff at this year, no doubt. How many times have you seen an F1 team throw away both of their drivers' chances at personal best results for themselves and the team, though? It will be hard to top that. ;)
 
Truex_rox said:
There will be plenty to laugh or scoff at this year, no doubt. How many times have you seen an F1 team throw away both of their drivers' chances at personal best results for themselves and the team, though? It will be hard to top that. ;)
Click to expand...

Hard to top, but I am sure someone will manage. Granted, the bar has still been set pretty high.
 
FLRacingFan said:
If anything Liberty and FOM probably love it since more people will be inclined to subscribe to F1 TV.
Click to expand...

I think if it’s reasonably priced and it comes as an app you can install on say....your gaming console or any streaming device I will probably give it a shot.
 
Autosport forum usually has a "rate the race" thread after every F1 event, with special awards. We can try that here and it will be good fun.

It goes something like this:

Best Driver: Gotta go with Mags. Here's a guy that has been shuffled out of the series twice, and comes back swinging every time. It looks like he has the measure of his teammate, who was once considered the next big star. Ran a storming Australian GP and got hosed for his efforts, but at least now he's showed everyone that he's for real. I hope he has big race in Bahrain.

Worst Driver: Surprisingly I didn't seen anyone drive badly.

Best Team: No team really stood out except for Ferrari winning the race and having both cars on the podium. Hard to vote against that.

However, I think McLaren definitely deserves a special mention here. First race with the Renault and they are right in there with the Red Bulls and ahead of the factory cars. This is their best result since, unbelievably, their Mercedes era. Great to see them featuring more and hope they can pick off a couple of wins. I'm going out on a limb and predicting Alonso wins Monaco.

However, if they had continued on to finish fifth and sixth, I would have gone with Haas.

Worst Team: And since they didn't carry on from a superb position, Hass is my worst team this weekend. Utter, cataclysmic meltdown.

Best Overtake: Was there one?

Tires and DRS: Even running the two softest compounds I don't believe anyone two stopped, so where's the story? Even with 3 DRS zones there was next to no overtaking, so where's that story?

Race in a sentence: Not much racing and the winner determined by fluke. Let's hope Bahrain is much better. I love night racing.




Best Overtake: 
Best Moment: 

DRS + Tyres: 
And the race in a sentence:
 
The coverage was pretty bad. It appeared they just added commercials at regular intervals to some feed. Sometimes the commercials came when something would need explanation. I timed one commercial break at 3 minutes. F1 hasn't figured out how to deal with pace cars yet, in NASCAR the pits are closed when a caution occurs.
 
F1 should be embarrassed by the product. It’s amazing how much better Indycar and NASCAR are at the moment.

The air turbulence off these cars is just causing such a headache for the racing leagues, people wanna see passes but when dirty air is getting incredibly disruptive it’s ruining these longer racetracks. I don’t envy the position these sanctioning bodies are in
 
ESPN seemed to just scalp off of the SKY feed, kinda sad, but at least I got
to see the race. I always heard how great the Brundle commentary is,
I just did not see it this go round.

Haas left a bunch of team points out there. Doing 100 pit stops a day between
now and Bahrain should fix that.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Naturally, it is not the cars - but the tracks!

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/calls-for-albert-park-layout-to-be-reviewed-1019438/
Click to expand...

The way F1 hands out fines and suspensions, the drivers will never be allowed to say anything is the FIA's fault or anything at all is ever wrong with the cars. Also remember that the teams don't want to change a damm thing that costs them even a nickel, so of course the teams and drivers are going blame anything and everything else. It's more convenient to just pass the blame off on the circuits and make them spend millions of dollars on problems that don't exist. You can change the cars once, and fix them, or change the circuits every year, or worse eliminate the challenging ones altogether.

Remember, before such advanced aerodynamics, they put on some good races at most of these tracks the drivers are complaining about being impossible to pass on. I'll bet if you put Indycars down on any Grand Prix track they would have more passes on the opening lap than F1 would have in an entire race.

F1 cars have a lot working against them that Indycars don't:

Dirty Defending
The first problem is the ridiculous one move" swerving rule. You can wait until the following driver swings out to pass, and then smartly move over, and offer him the choice of backing off or colliding. That's your one legal move, and it's already killed drivers in the lower formula. Any discussion about safety is pointless as long as the drivers can act like possessed, rabid little zombie satans.

With a well timed swerve, you kill the overtaking driver's momentum and that's the end of it. This is made even worse with DRS, because the guy in front is a sitting duck and if he doesn't swerve over, he's going to get passed. It doesn't matter what you do to the cars or tracks as long as you allow this kind of blocking. It's not even one move either as evidenced by Grosjean changing lines three times on one straight to hold Verstappen back. They don't even enforce their own rules, so why have any all? How are you ever going to have fair overtaking as long as you allow such blatantly unfair defending?

Bad Aero
The biggest problem, though, are the aerodynamics. F1 cars have sprouted so many little aero pieces that not only are they an eyesore, but those pieces create so much turbulence it's no wonder any car behind is driving in such dirty air. All of these little bit are creating turbulence on top of the car, which disturbs the following car's airflow much more than turbulence produced from under that car. Indycar has scaled back downforce/turbulence producing bits on top of the cars by scaling back the wing sizes and replacing a lot of the lost downforce with larger ground effects tunnels. Now producing less turbulence, the Indycars went out and first time set a record for overtakes at St. Petersburg, another circuit that was supposedly one of those places where you couldn't pass.

As early as last year, even Hamilton was saying you had to be 1.5 seconds a lap faster, but as soon as you got there the turbulence upset the car so badly you would burn the tires off in a lap or two. Since you have to be within 1 second to activate DRS, but have an impossible wall at 1.5, how can you ever get close enough except maybe on the straight, where chopping, blocking and swerving will end any chance you have there.

Short Braking Zones
It's even harder to pass when the braking zones are so short. Short zones give you less time/distance to pull alongside another car (especially after he just blocked you on the straight). A nice side benefit of the new Indycar's reduced downforce is that you can't stop the car as quickly, so now braking zones are much longer and facilitate many more out braking opportunities. You could see it every lap in T1 at St, Petersburg that someone was trying to dive down the inside of another car. The difference between last year with the heavily down forced car and this year's lightly down forced car is very stark. Remember, it's still the same car, but with different aero. You could hardly pass with one last year, but simply by cleaning up the aero Indycars produce more overtaking in one race than we are likely to see this entire season in F1.

This is just part of it, and it's all easy to fix. Just clean up the aero. I get it that F1 has to have the fastest road racing cars in the world, but they still would be. The new car would have big enough tires that they will still be fine. With less down force and the loss of drag will be so great they will make up the lap times with faster straight speeds. I mean, they took 1000 pounds off the Indycars and they are breaking records in testing, and even at the first race before the teams truly understand the new car and how to get it to go fast. By the end of the season they will probably be looking for ways to slow them a little.

I don't know what the hell is wrong with the people running F1. They are so hung up on this green agenda and their beloved hybrids we can hardly hope they will change any of that. We can hope they fix the aero, and even though they knew this was the problem, last year they thought they could bandaid the problem and give them bigger, more turbulence producing wings. It was like a "let's make the problem better by making it worse" kind of thinking.
 
Last edited:
Aerodynamics have been a problem with all forms of racing since they put a wing (or spoiler) on a car. In recent years it looks like lower down force produces better racing. (Jim Hall of Chaparral sports car racing started the whole ground effect tech in the mid 1970s).
 
Zerkfitting said:
Aerodynamics have been a problem with all forms of racing since they put a wing (or spoiler) on a car.
Click to expand...

Certainly, but the more advanced and complicated the aero is, the worse the problem is. Check any Indycar race (with their simple aero) and their racing is a stark comparison to Formula One's processional parades.

It's hard to make comparisons of eras in F1 because the equipment disparity has always been so wide, but I think we can all agree the racing was better when the aero was less complicated. Maybe the best racing we ever saw was Villevenue vrs Arnoux at Dijon in 79. Yes, those were full ground effects cars, which gave them the grip, but in this era they were still running simple single and double element wings (instead of todays fifty element) wings that did not create crippling turbulence.


​

So I'm thinking less upper body aero and more downforce from the underbody (which makes less turbulence) is probably the best way forward. This seems to be working really well in Indycars. The sad thing is that the FIA are such arrogant buffoons they will never admit they ever got anything wrong, or that someone else had a better idea, so I am firmly convinced that they will leave the cars unchanged even next year. They will site too much development cost when a new formula is right around the corner and we will be stuck with bad racing at least until then.

In recent years it looks like lower down force produces better racing.
Click to expand...

I think equally important is the type of down force used. Down force from upper body wings and tack on aero pieces, barge boards, turning vanes, vortex generators, wobbly bobble and tire squish eliminators (no kidding, that's really a thing) really churn up the air coming off the cars and produce far more turbulence to the car behind that down force generated by the underside of the car.

Jim Hall of Chaparral sports car racing started the whole ground effect tech in the mid 1970s.
Click to expand...

Technically the "sucker car" was not really a ground effects car because the down force was created by a rotating fan instead of being produced by air flowing under the car, though the effect was the same. Hall was on the right track, but it was Colin Chapman who turned that underbody airflow to advantage with the Lotus 76, and perfected it with the Lotus 79.
 
Last edited:
I used to race 200mph radio controlled Formula One model airplanes. You had to be careful following other planes into a turn because if you got into their wake it could shut off all airflow to your plane and it would drop out of the air like a rock. Of course, we were flying 10 feet off the deck, and at 200mph it did not take very long for that to become zero.

Even off to the side a little you could still have the plane become unsettled by the turbulence coming off the leading plane's wing tip (which is the worst turbulence produced by the entire plane). As a result, we usually flew above or below and plane we were following and that kept the plane in cleaner air. Our course was 2.5 miles per 10 laps, so after a few laps you were actually flying through the turbulence you created the lap before. Eventually I learned to read the turbulence, stay out of it, and win races.

The term "ground effect" comes from the aviation world. "Ground effect" is when the airplane is half a wing span from the ground. The air coming off the plane hits the ground and becomes even more turbulent, and that effects the plane. It's basically having it's own turbulence turned against the plane, and part of why landing can be so hairy, especially if you have wind involved too.

Where this comes into play on race cars is that they are always in ground effect. They are always creating and running through their own turbulence because they really are so close to the ground. On formula cars the big open wheels create a buttload of bad air that you don't really get off of sports cars and this is why the additional turbulence off a lead car makes a bad problem even worse.
 
Doc Austin said:
The way F1 hands out fines and suspensions, the drivers will never be allowed to say anything is the FIA's fault or anything at all is ever wrong with the cars. Also remember that the teams don't want to change a damm thing that costs them even a nickel, so of course the teams and drivers are going blame anything and everything else. It's more convenient to just pass the blame off on the circuits and make them spend millions of dollars on problems that don't exist. You can change the cars once, and fix them, or change the circuits every year, or worse eliminate the challenging ones altogether.

Remember, before such advanced aerodynamics, they put on some good races at most of these tracks the drivers are complaining about being impossible to pass on. I'll bet if you put Indycars down on any Grand Prix track they would have more passes on the opening lap than F1 would have in an entire race.

F1 cars have a lot working against them that Indycars don't:

Dirty Defending
The first problem is the ridiculous one move" swerving rule. You can wait until the following driver swings out to pass, and then smartly move over, and offer him the choice of backing off or colliding. That's your one legal move, and it's already killed drivers in the lower formula. Any discussion about safety is pointless as long as the drivers can act like possessed, rabid little zombie satans.

With a well timed swerve, you kill the overtaking driver's momentum and that's the end of it. This is made even worse with DRS, because the guy in front is a sitting duck and if he doesn't swerve over, he's going to get passed. It doesn't matter what you do to the cars or tracks as long as you allow this kind of blocking. It's not even one move either as evidenced by Grosjean changing lines three times on one straight to hold Verstappen back. They don't even enforce their own rules, so why have any all? How are you ever going to have fair overtaking as long as you allow such blatantly unfair defending?

Bad Aero
The biggest problem, though, are the aerodynamics. F1 cars have sprouted so many little aero pieces that not only are they an eyesore, but those pieces create so much turbulence it's no wonder any car behind is driving in such dirty air. All of these little bit are creating turbulence on top of the car, which disturbs the following car's airflow much more than turbulence produced from under that car. Indycar has scaled back downforce/turbulence producing bits on top of the cars by scaling back the wing sizes and replacing a lot of the lost downforce with larger ground effects tunnels. Now producing less turbulence, the Indycars went out and first time set a record for overtakes at St. Petersburg, another circuit that was supposedly one of those places where you couldn't pass.

As early as last year, even Hamilton was saying you had to be 1.5 seconds a lap faster, but as soon as you got there the turbulence upset the car so badly you would burn the tires off in a lap or two. Since you have to be within 1 second to activate DRS, but have an impossible wall at 1.5, how can you ever get close enough except maybe on the straight, where chopping, blocking and swerving will end any chance you have there.

Short Braking Zones
It's even harder to pass when the braking zones are so short. Short zones give you less time/distance to pull alongside another car (especially after he just blocked you on the straight). A nice side benefit of the new Indycar's reduced downforce is that you can't stop the car as quickly, so now braking zones are much longer and facilitate many more out braking opportunities. You could see it every lap in T1 at St, Petersburg that someone was trying to dive down the inside of another car. The difference between last year with the heavily down forced car and this year's lightly down forced car is very stark. Remember, it's still the same car, but with different aero. You could hardly pass with one last year, but simply by cleaning up the aero Indycars produce more overtaking in one race than we are likely to see this entire season in F1.

This is just part of it, and it's all easy to fix. Just clean up the aero. I get it that F1 has to have the fastest road racing cars in the world, but they still would be. The new car would have big enough tires that they will still be fine. With less down force and the loss of drag will be so great they will make up the lap times with faster straight speeds. I mean, they took 1000 pounds off the Indycars and they are breaking records in testing, and even at the first race before the teams truly understand the new car and how to get it to go fast. By the end of the season they will probably be looking for ways to slow them a little.

I don't know what the hell is wrong with the people running F1. They are so hung up on this green agenda and their beloved hybrids we can hardly hope they will change any of that. We can hope they fix the aero, and even though they knew this was the problem, last year they thought they could bandaid the problem and give them bigger, more turbulence producing wings. It was like a "let's make the problem better by making it worse" kind of thinking.
Click to expand...
It's bizarre, but not unexpected, that they would actually lay the blame on the circuits rather than their "we're gonna make the cars five seconds faster" initiative. Going back to 2009, and excluding the 2010 wet race, there were 25, 29, 41, 59, 29, 10, 37, 2, and 5 overtakes in the Australian GP. Albert Park is one of the toughest tracks to pass on, but it didn't just suddenly become another Monaco last year. F1 cars are awesome to watch lap, but if they're not passing each other then the whole "quickest cars anywhere" schtick gets old in a hurry. Not that overtaking is the be-all, end-all of motorsport but it shouldn't be damn near impossible unless you're two seconds quicker like it was this past weekend. And F1 is going to be the quickest regardless, I don't know exactly who they're afraid of losing out to. Indy cars are not going to be quicker than them any time soon. LMP1s are not going to be quicker any time soon. I don't really get the infatuation with lap times.
 
Doc Austin said:
Where this comes into play on race cars is that they are always in ground effect. They are always creating and running through their own turbulence because they really are so close to the ground. On formula cars the big open wheels create a buttload of bad air that you don't really get off of sports cars and this is why the additional turbulence off a lead car makes a bad problem even worse.
Click to expand...
This is why IndyCar's UAK18 still has the rear wheel flicks in front, their drag numbers weren't nearly as good when they tested without them.

There are so many aero elements on a modern F1 car I can't possibly imagine what a CFD analysis of cars running nose-to-tail looks like.
 
Pretty massive drop for the F1 opener at Melbourne. I thought being on the ESPN family of networks alone would boost ratings this year. Big swing and a miss. I think the lack of promotion by ESPN, especially compared to NBC, could prove to be very costly.

 
And one of Liberty's goals was to make F1 more popular in America!

You gotta wonder how many people watched qualifying, and between the bad coverage and halo decided to skip the race.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Pretty massive drop for the F1 opener at Melbourne. I thought being on the ESPN family of networks alone would boost ratings this year. Big swing and a miss. I think the lack of promotion by ESPN, especially compared to NBC, could prove to be very costly.
Click to expand...

Me too. Obviously one race is not conclusive with audience sizes in this range. Other motorsports I follow with similar followings can be all over the place from one week to the next. But this wasn't a good start in any regard. Universally panned coverage, smaller audience, streaming app delayed, frustrating finish with nobody able to pass slower cars in front of them. Imagine how thrilling that race would have been if they had a racier formula.

With the audience for the morning replay higher than the live broadcast, I don't recall if there was a comparable replay on NBCSN last year.
 
gnomesayin said:
Me too. Obviously one race is not conclusive with audience sizes in this range. Other motorsports I follow with similar followings can be all over the place from one week to the next. But this wasn't a good start in any regard. Universally panned coverage, smaller audience, streaming app delayed, frustrating finish with nobody able to pass slower cars in front of them. Imagine how thrilling that race would have been if they had a racier formula.

With the audience for the morning replay higher than the live broadcast, I don't recall if there was a comparable replay on NBCSN last year.
Click to expand...
What would worry me is that besides NBC’s initial season (124k) they never got below 222k for Australia and reached as high as 260k. They did a good job building viewership quickly through their tenure and this is pretty well outside that range.

I don’t know about last year but they’ve done encores before. 2016 the encore also did better.
 
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/verstappen-switched-off-worthless-melbourne-race-1019097/

Red Bull Formula 1 driver Max Verstappen says he would have switched off the “completely worthless” Australian Grand Prix had he been watching it as a fan.
The Melbourne season opener had noticeably little in the way of not only completed overtakes but any wheel-to-wheel battles, with only five passes taking place after the first lap.

A potential fight for victory fizzled out as Lewis Hamilton could not get close enough to challenge Sebastian Vettel, a theme common throughout the field as F1's heavy, high-downforce machines struggled to follow one another around the Albert Park circuit.

Verstappen endured a particularly frustrating race, saying afterwards he found it “very boring”.

Asked what the grand prix would've been like for fans, the Dutchman answered bluntly: “Completely worthless. I would have turned off the TV.

“[It was] very boring. You do your best to try something, and I was in DRS range all the time, but there is nothing you can do.”

Verstappen spent almost the entire race stuck behind slower cars, after dropping behind the Haas of Kevin Magnussen at the start.

He followed Magnussen over the opening laps, but could not make a move and eventually suffered what he and the team reckoned was a damage-induced spin at Turn 1.

This demoted him behind the Renault of Nico Hulkenberg, who he also could not pass – and while he managed to eventually recover to sixth place after a pitstop and a safety car intervention, he then spent the final 27 laps unsuccessfully looking for a way past McLaren's Fernando Alonso.

His Red Bull teammate Daniel Ricciardo pulled off a spectacular Turn 13 move on Hulkenberg early in the race, but was then stuck behind first the Haas of Romain Grosjean and then Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen.

Verstappen said: “[The Haas cars] were a second slower than the Ferraris. They were just lucky that they came in front of us.

“And here you can't overtake. Look at Hamilton and Vettel. And the same story with Alonso. They were also much slower, but you can’t pass them. You try, but it doesn’t make any difference.

“Even if you are one-and-a-half seconds faster, it’s still not possible to overtake.”

The FIA had anticipated overtaking would be difficult at Albert Park, and added a third DRS zone for the 2018 race, but Verstappen insisted this “won't help” resolve the issue going forward.

He stressed that he did not feel the circuit was a problem, saying: “It is more down to the cars, because there used to be no problem with overtaking.”
Click to expand...
 
Andretti: F1 missed chance to adopt "pure" IndyCar design

Who can be surprised? We have seen this over and over and over. Way to go geniuses. Just do the opposite of what works (especially if it's American), just for spite, and see what kind of result you get, like, say the Australian street parade.

The European's predictable refusal to accept any American ideas (until they need us to stop them from killing each other, that is) continues to give us the worst racing and unhealthiest sport we have ever seen. They won't even accept good ideas from America, all because they have to go their own way, convinced that even their embarrassing failures are the pinnacle.

But, hey, let's put the French in charge. The sport will suffer for it but at least we will have sad comedy.

There are a lot of reasons why F1 can't adopt the new Indycar (mostly because it's an Indycar), but the ideas of reducing turbulence and upper body down force are solid, and St. Petersburg (with it's record number of overtakes) proves it works. The FIA saw what Indycar was doing well before the rules were laid for the latest F1 monstrosity, and yet they still chose to give us more of what wasn't working already, presumably to do something, anything different from those ugly Americans, even if it's wrong, which Australia proved it is.

Any rational person could watch St. Petersburg, and then watch Australia and make up their own minds what is working and what isn't. I will have to do a search, but I believe even this time last year we were talking about how the bigger tires and wider stance would help, but the bigger wings and associated turbulence would make the cars impossible to race. We knew it going into the season, so the FIA has had at least a year come up with a fix. Even internet dumbasses, who know nothing compared to the great gods of F1, saw this problem a year ago, and yet those gods either didn't get it or are too arrogant to admit their failure by addressing and correcting it.

F1 knew they had a problem, and they knew the solution, but they were happy to finish the year, make new cars that are even worse, and presumably are going to be happy making an even more worse (yeah, bad grammar, I know) car next year. After that we are supposed to have a new car, but I have confidence they can screw that up too. What the FIA could do right now is ban all the ridiculous add on, tack on aero bits and trim the wings. Maybe (certainly) the teams will cry about development costs, moving the goal posts, bla, bla, bla, but maybe they could ask their accountants how much all the ugly turbulence generators they run all over the cars are costing to develop.

If nothing else, the FIA could act right now and the teams would have 10 or 11 months to convert what we already have to smaller wings, less aero widgets, and shallow tunnels. The cars would be every bit as fast, if not faster (like the lower down force Indycars are), and they would race much better. Sure, I know they have stability clauses in their rules, but the FIA almost never enforces it's own rules anyway and if all the teams go along with it, why not? Why not build next year's car to race better?

See, F1 (and the FIA) knows it is the pinnacle, and millions will watch just for that reason alone. They are so arrogant that they will force feed us whatever they please and think we will watch it, all because they are so wonderful and awesome. Well, right now they are putting a steaming turd on TV, and the numbers suggest people figured that out early and flipped the dial.

Who can be surprised considering this is an undeniable pattern? WEC also missed out on the chance to adopt IMSA's DPI class. Our racing is great with four manufacturers and more coming. The WEC has one and a bunch of privateers who you can just bet are going to get annihilated and probably won't make it back next year. With DPI, the WEC could have started with four manufacturers and about 30 privateer prototypes, and more would have surely come, but that's an awful American idea. Any American ideas are bad (even the ones that work), but the FIA's ideas, especially the ones that bring us horrible racing, incredible disparity between teams, and teams on the actual verge of bankruptcy, are all good. Great racing, big fields and healthy teams is an American idea, so it's really, really bad, bad, bad.

Now, does everyone understand why the France family absolutely had to save American sports car racing from the ACO and FIA? We are seeing it now that the FIA's ridiculous pandering to manufacturers in the WEC has blown up in their faces (again), so they are going to throw the privateers a bone to fill the gap, allow them to be barely competitive (though expect the BOP to be ridiculously in Toyota's favor, especially at Lemans) and rely on them to do the racing until they can attract more manufacturers who will simply destroy those privateers and run them out of the sport again.

Kill, rinse, repeat.
 
I watch formula 1 just because I DVR it and eventually get around to watching it when nothing else is on but it's by far my least favorite racing out of anything with an engine that I watch. I hate calling racing boring since that's always the first thing a non racing fan will say but formula 1 is an absolute snooze fest. It's almost always the same guys winning and up front, everyone acts like they are the best drivers in the world and their attitudes show it too. I really have no idea why anyone even wastes their time going to these events since I feel like I'm wasting my time watching on TV.
 
^^

The Mexican GP of 2016 is the most recent race that I actually sat through and watched the whole thing.
Why? It's a mixture of not getting ESPN, the broadcast schedule being quite far off of my own when it is actually being shown here, and what you said. ;)
 
This is F1's equivalent of NASCAR's Radioactive program. I like it, a lot. My favorite moments are definitely the ones in which Kimi crops up.
However, I genuinely felt sorry for Lewis when I heard his radio transmissions here. He's not a driver I care for too much, but man, just the fact that he had no idea what was going on and the team had no more of a clue than he did made me actually feel sorry for the guy. Just this once.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom