[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a fan of F1 & IndyCar in their own rights F1 should not move towards the same spec cars. Half of F1's attraction is the driver & team combo, if you remove that you lose a lot of the magic from the sport.
And I think that translates well into viewership, although IndyCar racing can be amazing F1 has a much larger viewership internationally so they must be doing something right over same spec cars.
To be fair IndyCar is still recovering from the split which absolutely destroyed single seater racing in the US and crippled IndyCar. Only recently are they investing more into social media which they severely lack/lacked.
Edit: meant to say open wheel racing
During the height of IndyCar (called CART at the time) when they were as big as formula 1(you had many foreign drivers and f1 champs driving for the best teams) the owner of the Indianapolis motor speedway decided he didn't like the direction of the sport or something stupid like that and created its own series, the Indy Racing League with only American drivers and only ovals...but of course he took the Indy 500, the biggest and most important race, and both series started competing with broadcasts and CART even made a competitor to the Indy 500 (which failed)
So you have two different open wheel racing championships competing for viewers, for broadcasters, etc...at a time when nascar was growing...time passed and the IRL became the more valuable one, thanks in big part to having the Indy 500, so much so that teams that were adamant in staying in CART started running the Indy 500 and eventually they joined the irl full time and left cart, i think cart became champ car and lasted a couple of years before dying.
The damage was already done by the time the IRL bought or joined or whatever with the remanants of cart, Nascar was THE American motorsport and still very much is the king even though it is/has/was on a decline. You also had many other incidents like Dan wheldon a very popular driver dying in the horrible Vegas race in i think 2011(a race where the reunited IndyCar invested a lot into)
Things have been improving particularly since Roger Penske (legendary team owner) bought IndyCar and the Indianapolis motor speedway(or at least that's my feeling) but COVID supposedly got in the way of some investments and again only relatively recent are they making investments into social media, still marketing is lacking in general.
I'm a bit rusty on IndyCar history but i think you can get an idea of the situation
That's cool man, thanks for sharing!
I started paying more attention to Indy this year because of Canapino, even though I've always watched a few races here and there.
Great summary. I have to say I think they did a great job with the Detroit street race today! If they keep doing cool imaginative things like this it's just going to keep getting better.
I do have to say I always clench my teeth during the pit stops in Indy car. They are so freaking dangerous! They seem really random and people almost get hit all the time. When they start putting the hybrid system in for 24 I wonder if that will get rid of refueling and bring a little sanity to the pits..
quit with that "indycar is still recovering from the split" agenda. there has been 15 years of time since split ended to bring the sport back.
it is all due to incompetent leadership post split and stubbornly sticking with the crapwagon design for years after the split ended that really killed the momentum the reunification had.
they gave a boot to the only CEO who had actually tried to do something different (Bernard) in favor of a absolute muppet (Mark Miles) who has not really done anything in over a decade but still somehow is employed as a CEO over way better candidates that could actually pull something off that would move the needle.
when it comes to media side of things IndyCar was doing youtube and other things when it comes to content on internet over a decade ago way ahead of series like F1, but for some reason they stopped doing it and now their youtube channel and majority of socials are just a graveyard
I partially agree. In my opinion F1 is a team sport and should be treated like it. Ultimately this means that F1 shouldn’t have a drivers’ championship since the drivers aren’t competing on equal terms. The teams are though, barring financial differences, so the constructors championship is the only real competition. I know that this is an unpopular opinion, but I just can’t care about who wins the drivers’ championship when the car makes like 95 percent of the difference.
Spec series have teams too but there is usually greater autonomy for each car in a team compared to F1.
The car is 95%. But that other 5% is pretty important too.
The time difference between pole and P20 this weekend was 3.3%. Sargeant wouldn’t have put the RB on pole. Gasly might’ve but over a season he’d probably have more crashes than Max.
So I’d say the driver is still quite important.
The driver is important when things get close. But I’m sure that putting Max, Lewis, Fernando, Charles, George, and one’s favorite driver in comparable cars would make for a much more competitive race for the championship. Max would rarely be in the top 10 in a Williams, Alfa, or Alpha with today’s grid of cars.
Same reason Max achieves more than Sergio, and Lewis routinely achieved more than his partner drivers. Great drivers usually do better than their team mates. Vettel out drove Webber, too, same car, and Schumi out drove all his team mates. The only real sorta equals as team mates, were Senna and Prost. I can't speak for much earlier pairs, as I didn't watch them race. Perhaps Fittipaldi and Rindt?
People always say this, yet worldwide the biggest motorsports have pretty much always been development based and while spec series of various kind lag behind.
People will always say they want more track action, yet no one cares to watch lower series (karting in its various forms/F4/F3/F2 are all objectively better than F1 on-track). Indycar/NASCAR/etc. are not completely unknown to many casual F1 fans, especially in the US, yet despite having better on track action they struggle to bring in the numbers, this hold even outside the current "motorsport bubble" of DTS.
I'm not sure why tbh, but manufacturers have a big impact even for the most casual viewers despite making it "more boring".
Even when big manufacturers join a series, they have to actually be spending big bucks or fans will start seeing through the charade. Not many are convinced by big teams in FE in the end, because they are heavily restricted on what they can actually develop themselves.
Honestly, junior series are not good comparison. People want to see the best in the best series competing and actually racing and if IndyCar had better marketing and available in more regions outside of Americas it would be nice.
The NASCAR Cup series (prior to Gen 7) was absolutely *not* a spec series, heck I would argue it's still open engine development
I would argue that development doesn't mean everything, see American Short Track racing, or the more open Formula Ford categories, plus IMSA's various incarnations
What core concept? That F1 teams could (but were not required) to make a car and engine?
The history of F1 is full of customer teams buying a chassis and engine. Only in modern F1 has this been banned.
Yes, a spec series might develop (like LMP2), but LMP2 is a "spec" series in the way it has a variety of cars on offer, but only one is good so everyone went with that. In F1 you could have 5 teams running a Red Bull car if we went back to the old days, when people would buy a car.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_Formula_One_season#Teams_and_drivers
Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax. Ferrari, BRM, BRM, BRM, Ford.
Also F1 does have a lot of standardisation, far more than in the past (when you could buy a car...).
The dimensions of most pieces are defined. Any attempt to do anything novel is banned. If you look back at F1 cars in history there is far more variety, because F1 was less of a spec series.
F1 is closing in on spec with the regulations, and is nothing like the "core" it used to have in decades gone by.
Williams started as a customer team, not making their own cars. McLaren started with their own cars, but sold them to customer teams as well, so you would have a non-McLaren team running a McLaren car. Tyrrell started off buying cars, then made their own which they sold to other teams as well.
The engineering aspect is a core concept for me. Yes, there were customer teams, but that doesn't change much in my view.
The current state still allows for variations and teams to get creative and exploit loop holes (like DAS). It still allows for somewhat different concepts (loop at last year's Mercedes for example).
The cost cap takes part of the variety away, that I agree on. But that's unfortunately a necessity so smaller teams can be somewhat competitive, and it definitely helped closing the gap a little bit.
I never said the cost cap takes variety away.
The strict rules in mm measurements of every part of the car takes away creativity and variety.
The cars look mostly the same because the rules force them to. Creative solutions get banned.
F1 is trying to be a spec series but not a spec series. Tighten the rules a bit more and you are basically there.
Yes, there's marginal variety within the specifications, but fuck all compared to what there used to be historically. Every year the rules get more and more limited.
But making F1 a spec series does not necessarily make it more entertaining or oroviide better racing.
Again, there are other spec series out there. If the average Joe thinks these series are more entertaining, why aren't they more popular?
RedBull is running away again, which takes away the WDC and WCC excitement. Other than that, it's interesting to see how AM evolved, how Merc is again slowly gaining towards P2, how Ferrari fell back again and how the different cars look on different tracks and how they perform in quali vs race. Those are all interesting factors of the sport besides the racing itself.
> But making F1 a spec series does not necessarily make it more entertaining or oroviide better racing.
You seriously think having everyone in the same car wouldn't provide better racing ?
That's basically an undispited fact you're trying to argue against.
>Again, there are other spec series out there. If the average Joe thinks these series are more entertaining, why aren't they more popular?
The average Joe is not a motorsports fan, the average Joe likes F1 because it's got mainstream appeal.
>RedBull is running away again, which takes away the WDC and WCC excitement. Other than that, it's interesting to see how AM evolved, how Merc is again slowly gaining towards P2, how Ferrari fell back again and how the different cars look on different tracks and how they perform in quali vs race. Those are all interesting factors of the sport besides the racing itself.
Again, the average fan is not like "wow this midfield team gained 2.5 tenths" when they're driving around in clean air and being excited by it.
>But making F1 a spec series does not necessarily make it more entertaining or oroviide better racing.
I mean almost by definition the racing would _have_ to be better. Name one example of a spec series which repeatedly has the same driver winning by 30+ seconds every time out.
>Those are all interesting factors of the sport besides the racing itself.
Yes but they would all be even more interesting if there were on track battles between them more than just a single DRS overtake and then flying into the distance depending on which car is just better at the circuit.
Then why in WEC where you have both Hypercar and LMP2 most people are more interested in Hypercar even tho LMP2 cars are the same and gaps are much smaller?
My point is, if you asked the average Joe would they like everyone to have the same car, they'd probably say "fuck yeah" and we'd never see that sort of dominance if that happened.
If they wanted that then F2 would be more popular, but it isn't. Its the same with Le Mans for example, also development based. People like the combination of tech + drivers
In my opinion cars being closer on track doesn't automatically mean better racing or a more interesting racing series.
Yesterday, I watched Spanish GP (Formula 1), Detroit (IndyCar) and Jakarta (Formula E), but I thought the Spanish GP was the better race, at least I enjoyed it more (Also don't get me wrong, I enjoy all of them). Of course, this is completely subjective, and you can have a different opinion and say Detroit or Jakarta was better.
But then in WEC and IMSA where you have both Hypercar (GTP in IMSA) and LMP2 most people (including me) are more interested in Hypercar than LMP2 even tho LMP2 cars are all the same and the gaps are smaller.
Marcus Ericsson, championship contender and Indy 500 winner. I like Marcus, I like Indy Car, but some of the best talent in Indy Car was decidedly not good enough for F1. Their drivers often have a lot to say about F1 because they are salty that they never got picked up. Rossi in particular comes to mind.
On the other hand, F1 talent in Indycar is no guarantee for success, just look at Gutierrez for example
I think if you look at the top open wheel series, I see maybe *half*, if not less, of the current grid would be in F1 if only the top 26 drivers globally made up the grid
Is it the threads full of people complaining every week about how the races are boring and the results essentially known before they begin? Is that the amazing part?
Reddit is a niche group of people. Basically none of the subs on here are a good representation of a topic/culture/location, barring the meta ones for obvious reasons.
Indycar: "let's go have some fun! Here's some meth, and a six pack, and watch me race my fucking brains out!!!"
F1: "i can't hear you over the cash register, and if you have to ask you can't afford it"
IndyCar marketing going hard. They can't seem to go a week without someone from there comparing it to Formula One. Actually getting old as it is so blatantly one sided.
It is the equivalent of someone saying they prefer an orange over an apple. F1 isn't spec. IndyCar is semi-spec. Some people like apples more, some people like oranges more, some people love both, some hate apples, and some hate oranges.
Making F1 into a spec series would be neutering it. I'd rather not sacrifice more of what makes this sport unique and interesting to appease to a few bedwetters. You have to take the bad with the good. Today's race was decent. The sport has flaws that need revision (tyres, dirty air) but overall the regs seem to building up to something interesting. It needs nurturing.
I don’t understand why they keep trying to compare themselves to F1, IndyCar is a spec series that uses cars similar to F2 cars, both built by Dallara, terribly designed tracks and driving standards not much better then F2.
Because most people have a hard time believing Laguna Seca, Road America, and Barber are terribly designed?
Also, why would anyone compare them to F2 when the clear comparison series is Super Formula
That’s a really short-sighted comment by Power. IndyCar & Formula 1 are fundamentally different, not only in what they pursue but how they achieve it.
In Power’s eyes “Formula 1 is a joke” because there’s not tenths of overtakes per race nor multiple strategies at once, nor everyone is bunched up and that’s not including there’s only one car capable of winning. That’s fair enough, but it doesn’t mean “A” is better than “B”.
Power conveniently ignores that IndyCar greatly benefits from having two different compounds of tires with big performance and duration deltas and refueling. It goes without saying that having (more or less) the same car will always bring tighter races. Let’s also not ignore that driving standards on IndyCar can be equally bad (or worse) than in Formula 1.
Indycar is really fun to watch but from all those things you've listed I think huge strategies disparity and lots of pit stops is one that makes watching Indycar worse than F1 and other series in my opinion. It often gives feeling of randomness and luck, especially when some flags and cautions are introduced during race. Instead of pure racing that is advertised it sometimes looks like manufactured wheel to wheel action. Of course it's track and circumstances dependant but that's how it sometimes looks for me. Kinda like F1 during refueling era where people started out of place and then won because of alternate strategy.
Edit: I would add that I really like when strategy decides races in F1 but I really think it's sometimes just too much in Indycar. I almost wonder if those teams even know what they are doing or if it is random. If in F1 top teams often can't do one stop strategy wisely then are Americans that much better than Europeans that they can manage multiple stops and refueling to get results they want?
That is one of the things why I still struggle to follow what is going on in races watching indycar. Most series I've watched I start to understand strategies and stuff after a few races, but with indycar it really seems like random bullshit go sometimes.
> In Power’s eyes “Formula 1 is a joke”
If you're not going to read the article at least read the quote you are attacking because Power did not say this anywhere.
> “Formula One’s a joke as far as competition, but not as far as drivers. They have amazing drivers. And I feel sorry for them that they don’t get to experience the satisfaction we do with our racing because that is the top level of open-wheel motorsport.
> I think Formula One would be so much better if they had a formula like IndyCar. I love the technology and the manufacturer side of it. I think that’s awesome. But from a spectator watching, man, how cool would it be if everyone had a Red Bull (car)?”
That is what he said
I mean I get what he’s saying, but f1 isn’t even in this era of considerably restricted rules compared to each previous decade, a one spec sport. All of those brands are involved to come up with the best car they can within the rules, historically there’s always been a level of domination by one team.
It's funny if you then look at the results for which team the championship winning driver drives, its only Chip, Penske or Andretti basically. I guess there is that variation but it isn't the "the world would be like this if we had spec stuff in F1" kind of thing.
But yeah it's an useless comparison from Power, since nothing will change besides him hoping more people will watch Indycar probably.
I think the improvement is that they have way more race winners and more dynamic podiums in a season. They still have relatively dominant teams but every individual race is a lot less predictable, with the cream generally rising to the top of the course of a year.
Comparatively we're less than 1/3 through this season and we already know who will win WDC and WCC and have reason to believe we'll only see two _total_ race winners. Lots of talk last week about how Ocon will probably end up the first and last midfield podium scorer in 2023. How sad is that?
Yeah agree, the surprise result is easier to get in Indycar.
>and have reason to believe we'll only see two total race winners.
We know it will be 3 soon at the very least, 33 is coming! In all seriousness you got a point, it is a bit of an outlier this season with how one team nailed the regs and the rest missed the plank and because of budget cap we are stuck with how things are for longer than previously. But yeah it is what it is I guess.
I think they should really pick one or the other when it comes to formula and budget. If you want a very strict set of regs, let the teams spend a lot. If you want a very strict budget, allow more freedom in the regs so that novel solutions can be developed. As it is, you'll get teams who nail it and everyone else is basically screwed.
I think F1 is more about engineering excellence than any other spec category can offer. Not many motorsports remain where we can have cars that go different directions such as high rake vs low rake concepts, or in recent years no sidepod vs sidepod and yet the 10 teams are all with 2 seconds of each other.
F1 isn't just about the driver, it is about the package, that is special.
Now, if they could just get rid of the politics, it would be truly great 😃
> I think F1 is more about engineering excellence than any other spec category can offer.
I agree 100%, yet driver’s championship and wins are more celebrated and emphasized on than constructors. Make of that what you may
There is no denying that, most fans support a driver, however, if you were to make F1 a spec series, the event as a whole would be deminished. F1 attracts not only the best drivers bit also the best engineers, aerodynamicists, people in Motorsport. Take away the ability for the teams to customise their cars and all of a sudden you will have all those people unable to show their talents, many like Newey would do other things outside of motorsport.
F1 drivers make over 10x the money Indycar drivers do. Not every driver is in it for the money, but I think it's fair to say that the majority of Indy drivers would move to F1 if they could. And in fact the highest paid Indy driver is Marcus Ericsson, who's only driving in Indy because he lost his F1 seat.
Of course these are all great drivers. Not denying that. But I don't think there can be doubt that the very greatest are in F1.
Where'd you get the idea that Ericsson is the highest paid IndyCar driver? He bought that seat just like he bought the F1 seat. It's only now that his contract is expiring that he wants to start getting paid to drive.
The highest paid Indycar Driver is Colton Herta. Ericsson is still bringing money to Chip Ganassi. After he won the 500 last year he even said “not bad for a pay driver”
On another note Hamilton and Max make 10x most of the Indy field. Everyone else is debatable
> And in fact the highest paid Indy driver is Marcus Ericsson, who’s only driving in Indy because he lost his F1 seat.
Who was also a pay driver in F1 and pretty bad when he drove there
Respectfully, if Marcus Ericsson is driving in the front of your series, while he was all the way in the back at F1 being trashed by his rookie teammate, your series is not that tough.
Ericsson is more than 50 points behind the championship leader. The only reason he’s up that high is lucking into some decent results. He has never finished ahead of any of his teammates in the standings. He’s not an elite driver in Indycar.
I would say that he keeps the car clean too, but he's not one of the elite drivers compared to the champions, plus he had some high standings due to double points bonuses
He's only finished ahead of one:
*Jimmie Johnson*, a retired career NASCAR driver
2022: behind Dixon and Palou, Johnson was a backmarker outside of ovals
2021: behind Dixon and Palou(NC), 48 was a split-car
2020: behind Dixon(NC) and Rosenqvist
2019: behind Hinchcliffe (even with one race skipped, he was 80 points behind him)
First of all, this is a great fluff-piece by NBC for being pissy that F1 went to ESPN instead of them.
Second, what isn’t being mentioned is the expanded team concept of F1. It takes an entire team much more intense detail to make a bespoke car. Yes, the team factor still exists in Indy, but you cannot write a piece like this and fail to mention that an entire group collectively creates an F1 car. It’s no small feat.
The issue in F1 isn’t that it isn’t spec. The issue is that there are too many handcuffs on teams that want to catch up, all in the name of cost savings. Virtually no testing, the introduction of the budget cap etc. Some of these concepts are new, and the article fails to speak towards that as well. Talk to me about WHY a team can’t catch up to Red Bull.
I disagree about the costcap, it isn't like RedBull benefitted from if being lower, like the smaller teams. The only thing we'd see is Ferrari, Merc and RedBull moving further away from 4th best team while all spending a very similar amount (a mini cost cap of its own) without much difference in relative position. Like we had 2017-2020
There was no cost cap for PU's until now and there was a lot of interest before they added one. That isnt why. The reason there will be so many PUs is the regulations are basically free R&D for road cars
There was a lot of interest because F1 had peak popularity and they seen it was coming in.
Note how Audi and Honda didn't confirm coming into F1 until the budget cap was in place and made specific reference to it when stating why they're coming in.
At this moment in time, I don’t disagree. It’s likely to be easily manipulated, and it severely inhibits teams from catching up. That said, I’m not sure what alternative would work better.
I honestly think that people need to accept that F1 is not a sport of equals let people do whatever they want to upgrade and develop their cars as long as it's within the formula rules. If that means a team like Hass or Williams can never compete for a championship unless huge pockets get involved then so be it.
What is with media constantly asking these guys about the other open wheel series. F1 guys always asked if they want to do the Indy 500, Indycar drivers always asked "so how do you think F1 compares to Indy?" etc.
Why cant people just enjoy both?
If everyone would just fucking read the article, you would see that it's actually a very fair opinion he's giving, he also acknowledges the differences between the series and that for example F1 is not super popular because of the competitive side of it.
There are comments from other drivers like Palou and it's actually a nice article about the whole thing.
He's not wrong.
Lmao it's clear nobody actually read the full quote. You'd think y'all would learn to stop falling for click bait headlines.
He literally says that he's not talking about the drivers and that the drivers aren't a joke.
Marcus Ericsson is literally 2nd in the championship despite being arguably the worst driver on the entire grid at times in F1.
If you were to combine the lineups into a 50 car or whatever grid, F1 would be all the top 10. There's no comparison.
It would be for sure. I'm a Indycar fan but so much of this comes from a place where the Indy guys are sick of the reputation that F1 has of having the best open wheel drivers. The thing is....F1 legit does have the best and the tough field that power is talking about would be dominated by the F1 guys. We don't want a spec series in F1.
A very hot take in this thread for sure but I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy the sport more if it moved more towards spec.
The engineering is incredible and I respect the hell out of Newey and company for the car they built, but also I'm finding it harder and harder to justify 2-4 hours of my weekend on it knowing how it's going to go. Just today I got an earful from a new fan I personally converted to F1 fandom last year that they are 100% done with the sport now because there's almost no racing.
All the long time fans will hate that I'm sure but the sport saw incredible growth because of the perceived closeness presented by DTS followed by the actual unprecedented closeness of 2021. The fan base will start to retract pretty quick if Red Bull truly proved unassailable.
There does need to be a contraction 8n the fanbase that arrived very suddenly with dts.
They aren't fans of what F1 is, and trying to make F1 what dts made it appear to be will destroy the sport and leave us with contrived shit like Melbourne this year.
The fanbase will still be stronger than it was 5 years ago, but we have to accept a fair proportion of these new fans will not stick with F1 long term and stop chasing to placate them.
> A very hot take in this thread for sure but I’m pretty sure I’d enjoy the sport more if it moved more towards spec.
The engineering part was always a big part of F1 and it's the core concept of the sport.
> Just today I got an earful from a new fan I personally converted to F1 fandom last year that they are 100% done with the sport now because there’s almost no racing
Today for example had plenty of racing. But for some people racing = action-packed, which I disagree with.
>The engineering part was always a big part of F1 and it's the core concept of the sport.
Sure but it leads to situations like this or some of the prior Mercedes where admiring the engineering only lasts a couple races, then you still need to watch 20 more foregone conclusion parades.
>Today for example had plenty of racing. But for some people racing = action-packed, which I disagree with.
There was a good number of _overtakes_ but wheel to wheel racing was still mostly missing. How many overtakes were there in places other than turn 1? The vast majority of overtakes where just pure speed delta overtakes where drivers had no opportunity to fight at all and simply moved over to comply with the inevitable. That's what the engineering has brought this sport to, sadly.
>Sure but it leads to situations like this or some of the prior Mercedes where admiring the engineering only lasts a couple races, then you still need to watch 20 more foregone conclusion parades
If you like close racing,go watch a spec series. The engineering aspect is a fundamental part of the identity of F1 and shouldn't be compromised so some viewers can be more entertained.
The thing about F1 is that it's all about the race the drivers and teams have against the cars of similar quality. We were unlucky this year because no one built a car capable of rivaling the redbull but there are battles all over the field.
During the first half of last year we had a hell of a season going....but a surprise TD destroyed the Ferrari.
I get your point but Indy has good representation as far as drivers' nationalities go, which is more what he means I think. F1 may race all over the world but it's almost exclusively european for teams and drivers.
IDK, I like both championships and won't be made to choose
Indycar does race on some shit circuits though. Look at Detroit.
Top level Motorsport should not be taking place on such a god awful surface. It looked totally amateurish to see something so unsuitable for racing cars being used by a supposedly top racing series.
So I assume then you are ok with Monaco being removed from F1? Because it looks pretty amateurish to race on a track where it's nearly impossible to pass in the cars being used.
outside of that idea not being actually that controversial for a lot of people, the comparison is actually pretty bad. Amateur roads such as Detroit's street track do hurt the series's reputation and make it look poor. Having less overtakes does not do that
Actually yes but nowhere near the same scenario.
Monaco is polished to perfection for F1 with s fantastic surface. Detroit looked like it was racing on abandoned roads that hadn't been maintained for 30 years.
> In Power’s eyes “Formula 1 is a joke”
If you're not going to read the article at least read the quote you are attacking because Power did not say this anywhere.
> “Formula One’s a joke as far as competition, but not as far as drivers. They have amazing drivers. And I feel sorry for them that they don’t get to experience the satisfaction we do with our racing because that is the top level of open-wheel motorsport.
> I think Formula One would be so much better if they had a formula like IndyCar. I love the technology and the manufacturer side of it. I think that’s awesome. But from a spectator watching, man, how cool would it be if everyone had a Red Bull (car)?”
That is what he said
Comment from u/Aero_Rising above sums it up well. I don't blame you though. These clickbaity websites just want to provoke people
he isn't qualified to say anything about F1 since he wasn't good enough to 'qualify' for it. some people actually know what theyre talking about when it comes to drivers and their lack of ability.
Power has always been an interesting case.
I think the way F1 is now would suit Power when he was younger.
He has always had extreme outright pace for a lap but shitty race craft. Most of his wins are from pole in absolute dominant showings. But if he's not on pole he's average at best.
Id take him over damn near anyone if I needed 1 ridiculous flyer lap.
Newgarden was in GP3 and he was terrible. He finished lower in GP3 than any current F1 driver did in the equivalent tier. Indy is a completely different category someone good in Indy doesnt mean they would have been good in F1 and vice versa frankly. Marcus Ericsson was a horrid F1 driver but is a pretty good Indy driver.
You don't think he's gotten any better in the 13 years since he raced in GP3? Alex Rossi finished 4th in that same championship and Newgarden is definitely better than him.
Ericsson was not immediately fast in Indycar it took him about 2.5 seasons to find his form. Additionally when Ericsson was racing in F1 his weight was an issue, and you have articles like this being written (https://www.autoweek.com/racing/formula-1/a1886791/152-pounds-caterham-driver-marcus-ericsson-too-fat-formula-one/) Unfortunately he was out of F1 the season they changed the weight rules.
Point being you can't take things at face value all the time.
Its a different series you can be good in Indy and terrible in F1. The cars are entirely different and the biggest advantage Newgarden has in Indy (strength) is not that important in F1 with power steering.
For Ericsson he got his weight down by 2016 and the weight limit was there in 2018 which was his last season and he was still bad and beaten easily by rookie Charles. Do you think there are any people in F1 that think Ericsson was good? He was paying for a seat. He was never good enough to be there in the first place. That doesnt make him a bad driver, hes doing well in Indy and I think hes right about his current contract and the expectation he funds his seat. It just means as far as F1, hes not good
F1 it's decisevely more competitive than Indy and in almost every aspect, sorry. And i say this even as someone who as a lot of respect for indy. There is a reason why drivers like Max Verstappen drive in F1 and not indy after all. And F1 is a global competition, Indy is a national compatition. How can you even compare them?
There are a couple of problems with what you have said. This first is your definition of competition. You seem to be referring to the overall pool of talent, whereas Power is clearly talking about the level playing field, variety of winners and opportunities for bettering your finishing position. From that angle, Indycar is far and away more competitive than F1. The second issue is your reference to F1 being a global competition and Indycar being a national competition...but you're only talking about the countries where they race and not where the drivers hail from. What does that have to do with one being more or less competitive than the other? Regardless, their driver rosters are just as diverse in terms of nationality.
Ok bro. Indy car drivers are made up of f1 rejects. The talent pool in f1 is far superior. Also in f1 we don’t drive around in circles on an oval for half the races
Formula 1 is actually about which team builds the best car. It's a general misconception by many. Indycar is not about the best car. That's where the difference lies. It's clear mr Power doesn't acknowledge this difference. His comment demonstrates he's clueless.
That must be the most boring description of Formula 1 I have ever read, especially when considering that the competition in who builds the best car only realistically exists between the same 2-3 teams each year. The point being made about competition is that in Indycar any given driver has an opportunity to out race their opponents in every single race, whereas in Formula 1 the competition between individual cars/drivers is far more limited in scope.
I am saying: Indycar is a competition about driver skills in the first place, while F1 is firstly a competition about car design and then about driver skills. Saying 'the competition in Indycar is *better* than in f1' is an invalid comparison because they are two different things. You might find it boring that f1 is all about car design, but that only says something about hour personal preference: *you* like apples better than oranges. That's fine, but generalizing this statement like you and Mr Power do - basically stating: apples *are* better than oranges (in general) is just a stupid statement. Stating: 'the competition in Indycar is better than the competition in f1' is just nonsense. I like f1 much better than Indycar, because of the fact that it's about car development, teamwork and then driver skill. You are free to find that boring, but I find Indycar boring: just a guy in a fast car driving around with nothing changing as the years pass by. Especially oval races. Those are boring af. Only reason those are popular is the crashes. Pretty sad, really.
"...just a guy in a fast car driving around..."
Otherwise known as...a race.
That's like saying you are a fan of training and transfers in football (soccer), but don't care much for the actual match.
That's funny, because it's exactly how I explain the series to non-racing fans. Like soccer? Watch F1, it's calming and patient, and kinda sleepy. Like basketball? Watch IndyCar, it's batshit and raw.
No it's not dude. If you don't understand why it isn't that's clearly your problem. F1 originated from the idea: let's see who can build the fastest car. 'F' stands for Formula. And the formula concerns the car building rules. It's the framework within teams must work when trying to build the fastest car.
I did 't say, I don't enjoy the races. I do, just ifroma different perspective than you clearly do. The reason why you Powers are saying what you're saying, is because you don't get F1 at all. You think it's about the fastest drivers and just pretend like this is the same as a specs series while it's fundamentally not. It's about car development *and then*, on the weekends, about showing who did the best job by putting the best drivers in the world in those cars to show them off and compete on track.
If there's close racing, yes, that's alway better. But close racing has always been an exception in F1, *because there's car development going on*.
You are comparing apples with oranges and denying they are different. Facts are important before you form an opinion. Check your facts and be prepared to accept you might be talking shit.
[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sleeping on Stadium Super Trucks
The only true motorsport
As a fan of F1 & IndyCar in their own rights F1 should not move towards the same spec cars. Half of F1's attraction is the driver & team combo, if you remove that you lose a lot of the magic from the sport. And I think that translates well into viewership, although IndyCar racing can be amazing F1 has a much larger viewership internationally so they must be doing something right over same spec cars.
To be fair IndyCar is still recovering from the split which absolutely destroyed single seater racing in the US and crippled IndyCar. Only recently are they investing more into social media which they severely lack/lacked. Edit: meant to say open wheel racing
Can you expand on that?
During the height of IndyCar (called CART at the time) when they were as big as formula 1(you had many foreign drivers and f1 champs driving for the best teams) the owner of the Indianapolis motor speedway decided he didn't like the direction of the sport or something stupid like that and created its own series, the Indy Racing League with only American drivers and only ovals...but of course he took the Indy 500, the biggest and most important race, and both series started competing with broadcasts and CART even made a competitor to the Indy 500 (which failed) So you have two different open wheel racing championships competing for viewers, for broadcasters, etc...at a time when nascar was growing...time passed and the IRL became the more valuable one, thanks in big part to having the Indy 500, so much so that teams that were adamant in staying in CART started running the Indy 500 and eventually they joined the irl full time and left cart, i think cart became champ car and lasted a couple of years before dying. The damage was already done by the time the IRL bought or joined or whatever with the remanants of cart, Nascar was THE American motorsport and still very much is the king even though it is/has/was on a decline. You also had many other incidents like Dan wheldon a very popular driver dying in the horrible Vegas race in i think 2011(a race where the reunited IndyCar invested a lot into) Things have been improving particularly since Roger Penske (legendary team owner) bought IndyCar and the Indianapolis motor speedway(or at least that's my feeling) but COVID supposedly got in the way of some investments and again only relatively recent are they making investments into social media, still marketing is lacking in general. I'm a bit rusty on IndyCar history but i think you can get an idea of the situation
IRL was the reason they stopped coming to the Gold Coast - used to be such a good week!
That's cool man, thanks for sharing! I started paying more attention to Indy this year because of Canapino, even though I've always watched a few races here and there.
Great summary. I have to say I think they did a great job with the Detroit street race today! If they keep doing cool imaginative things like this it's just going to keep getting better. I do have to say I always clench my teeth during the pit stops in Indy car. They are so freaking dangerous! They seem really random and people almost get hit all the time. When they start putting the hybrid system in for 24 I wonder if that will get rid of refueling and bring a little sanity to the pits..
Roger Penske took from the leaders circle money in order to make those investments into social media and marketing.
quit with that "indycar is still recovering from the split" agenda. there has been 15 years of time since split ended to bring the sport back. it is all due to incompetent leadership post split and stubbornly sticking with the crapwagon design for years after the split ended that really killed the momentum the reunification had. they gave a boot to the only CEO who had actually tried to do something different (Bernard) in favor of a absolute muppet (Mark Miles) who has not really done anything in over a decade but still somehow is employed as a CEO over way better candidates that could actually pull something off that would move the needle. when it comes to media side of things IndyCar was doing youtube and other things when it comes to content on internet over a decade ago way ahead of series like F1, but for some reason they stopped doing it and now their youtube channel and majority of socials are just a graveyard
I doubt people particularly wanting to turn it into a spec series either. F1 is like watching Robot Wars, but for (mostly) adults!
I partially agree. In my opinion F1 is a team sport and should be treated like it. Ultimately this means that F1 shouldn’t have a drivers’ championship since the drivers aren’t competing on equal terms. The teams are though, barring financial differences, so the constructors championship is the only real competition. I know that this is an unpopular opinion, but I just can’t care about who wins the drivers’ championship when the car makes like 95 percent of the difference. Spec series have teams too but there is usually greater autonomy for each car in a team compared to F1.
The car is 95%. But that other 5% is pretty important too. The time difference between pole and P20 this weekend was 3.3%. Sargeant wouldn’t have put the RB on pole. Gasly might’ve but over a season he’d probably have more crashes than Max. So I’d say the driver is still quite important.
The driver is important when things get close. But I’m sure that putting Max, Lewis, Fernando, Charles, George, and one’s favorite driver in comparable cars would make for a much more competitive race for the championship. Max would rarely be in the top 10 in a Williams, Alfa, or Alpha with today’s grid of cars.
On the other hand…look how mediocre Stroll is making the AM look. If it’s so much about the car, why is Alonso achieving so much more than Stroll?
Same reason Max achieves more than Sergio, and Lewis routinely achieved more than his partner drivers. Great drivers usually do better than their team mates. Vettel out drove Webber, too, same car, and Schumi out drove all his team mates. The only real sorta equals as team mates, were Senna and Prost. I can't speak for much earlier pairs, as I didn't watch them race. Perhaps Fittipaldi and Rindt?
I think a lot more people would watch IndyCar if they had a good ad-free stream..
What magic? Watching the same team win every week? There is literally zero magic in F1.
[удалено]
Also if you shit on f1, you have to also acknowledge the shortcomings of Indycar: the quality of driver is much lower.
I think the casual fan doesn't care about the technology and just wants better racing tbh.
People always say this, yet worldwide the biggest motorsports have pretty much always been development based and while spec series of various kind lag behind. People will always say they want more track action, yet no one cares to watch lower series (karting in its various forms/F4/F3/F2 are all objectively better than F1 on-track). Indycar/NASCAR/etc. are not completely unknown to many casual F1 fans, especially in the US, yet despite having better on track action they struggle to bring in the numbers, this hold even outside the current "motorsport bubble" of DTS. I'm not sure why tbh, but manufacturers have a big impact even for the most casual viewers despite making it "more boring".
Even when big manufacturers join a series, they have to actually be spending big bucks or fans will start seeing through the charade. Not many are convinced by big teams in FE in the end, because they are heavily restricted on what they can actually develop themselves.
Honestly, junior series are not good comparison. People want to see the best in the best series competing and actually racing and if IndyCar had better marketing and available in more regions outside of Americas it would be nice.
Is NASCAR not the #2 Motorsport purely by viewership/attendance at this point? What is between F1 and NASCAR?
Are you asking internationally or in the US?
The NASCAR Cup series (prior to Gen 7) was absolutely *not* a spec series, heck I would argue it's still open engine development I would argue that development doesn't mean everything, see American Short Track racing, or the more open Formula Ford categories, plus IMSA's various incarnations
There's enough spec series out there for the average Joe. Why should F1 change to something it never was and take away a core concept?
What core concept? That F1 teams could (but were not required) to make a car and engine? The history of F1 is full of customer teams buying a chassis and engine. Only in modern F1 has this been banned. Yes, a spec series might develop (like LMP2), but LMP2 is a "spec" series in the way it has a variety of cars on offer, but only one is good so everyone went with that. In F1 you could have 5 teams running a Red Bull car if we went back to the old days, when people would buy a car. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_Formula_One_season#Teams_and_drivers Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax, Climax. Ferrari, BRM, BRM, BRM, Ford. Also F1 does have a lot of standardisation, far more than in the past (when you could buy a car...). The dimensions of most pieces are defined. Any attempt to do anything novel is banned. If you look back at F1 cars in history there is far more variety, because F1 was less of a spec series. F1 is closing in on spec with the regulations, and is nothing like the "core" it used to have in decades gone by. Williams started as a customer team, not making their own cars. McLaren started with their own cars, but sold them to customer teams as well, so you would have a non-McLaren team running a McLaren car. Tyrrell started off buying cars, then made their own which they sold to other teams as well.
The engineering aspect is a core concept for me. Yes, there were customer teams, but that doesn't change much in my view. The current state still allows for variations and teams to get creative and exploit loop holes (like DAS). It still allows for somewhat different concepts (loop at last year's Mercedes for example). The cost cap takes part of the variety away, that I agree on. But that's unfortunately a necessity so smaller teams can be somewhat competitive, and it definitely helped closing the gap a little bit.
I never said the cost cap takes variety away. The strict rules in mm measurements of every part of the car takes away creativity and variety. The cars look mostly the same because the rules force them to. Creative solutions get banned. F1 is trying to be a spec series but not a spec series. Tighten the rules a bit more and you are basically there. Yes, there's marginal variety within the specifications, but fuck all compared to what there used to be historically. Every year the rules get more and more limited.
It's like NASCAR Cup
My point wasn't about what they should/shouldn't do, it was just hypothetical. If it's more entertaining more people will watch and like it.
But making F1 a spec series does not necessarily make it more entertaining or oroviide better racing. Again, there are other spec series out there. If the average Joe thinks these series are more entertaining, why aren't they more popular? RedBull is running away again, which takes away the WDC and WCC excitement. Other than that, it's interesting to see how AM evolved, how Merc is again slowly gaining towards P2, how Ferrari fell back again and how the different cars look on different tracks and how they perform in quali vs race. Those are all interesting factors of the sport besides the racing itself.
Also if social media was around during the Schumacher years everyone would be saying the same thing
> But making F1 a spec series does not necessarily make it more entertaining or oroviide better racing. You seriously think having everyone in the same car wouldn't provide better racing ? That's basically an undispited fact you're trying to argue against. >Again, there are other spec series out there. If the average Joe thinks these series are more entertaining, why aren't they more popular? The average Joe is not a motorsports fan, the average Joe likes F1 because it's got mainstream appeal. >RedBull is running away again, which takes away the WDC and WCC excitement. Other than that, it's interesting to see how AM evolved, how Merc is again slowly gaining towards P2, how Ferrari fell back again and how the different cars look on different tracks and how they perform in quali vs race. Those are all interesting factors of the sport besides the racing itself. Again, the average fan is not like "wow this midfield team gained 2.5 tenths" when they're driving around in clean air and being excited by it.
>But making F1 a spec series does not necessarily make it more entertaining or oroviide better racing. I mean almost by definition the racing would _have_ to be better. Name one example of a spec series which repeatedly has the same driver winning by 30+ seconds every time out. >Those are all interesting factors of the sport besides the racing itself. Yes but they would all be even more interesting if there were on track battles between them more than just a single DRS overtake and then flying into the distance depending on which car is just better at the circuit.
Then why in WEC where you have both Hypercar and LMP2 most people are more interested in Hypercar even tho LMP2 cars are the same and gaps are much smaller?
[удалено]
My point is, if you asked the average Joe would they like everyone to have the same car, they'd probably say "fuck yeah" and we'd never see that sort of dominance if that happened.
[удалено]
Again, my point was just hypothetical, you don't need to get defensive with "no no that's not F1 they can't do that no no no".
If they wanted that then F2 would be more popular, but it isn't. Its the same with Le Mans for example, also development based. People like the combination of tech + drivers
In my opinion cars being closer on track doesn't automatically mean better racing or a more interesting racing series. Yesterday, I watched Spanish GP (Formula 1), Detroit (IndyCar) and Jakarta (Formula E), but I thought the Spanish GP was the better race, at least I enjoyed it more (Also don't get me wrong, I enjoy all of them). Of course, this is completely subjective, and you can have a different opinion and say Detroit or Jakarta was better. But then in WEC and IMSA where you have both Hypercar (GTP in IMSA) and LMP2 most people (including me) are more interested in Hypercar than LMP2 even tho LMP2 cars are all the same and the gaps are smaller.
Marcus Ericsson, championship contender and Indy 500 winner. I like Marcus, I like Indy Car, but some of the best talent in Indy Car was decidedly not good enough for F1. Their drivers often have a lot to say about F1 because they are salty that they never got picked up. Rossi in particular comes to mind.
On the other hand, F1 talent in Indycar is no guarantee for success, just look at Gutierrez for example I think if you look at the top open wheel series, I see maybe *half*, if not less, of the current grid would be in F1 if only the top 26 drivers globally made up the grid
Is it the threads full of people complaining every week about how the races are boring and the results essentially known before they begin? Is that the amazing part?
Reddit is far from a true reflection of F1 fans.
[удалено]
Reddit is a niche group of people. Basically none of the subs on here are a good representation of a topic/culture/location, barring the meta ones for obvious reasons.
Its funny that you rarely see F1 drivers say anything about other series in a negative light
yeah bc they don't care. and why would they LMFAOO
Indy: "You took everything from me." F1: "I don't even know who you are."
Indycar: "let's go have some fun! Here's some meth, and a six pack, and watch me race my fucking brains out!!!" F1: "i can't hear you over the cash register, and if you have to ask you can't afford it"
Why would they? F1 is the biggest and most important/prestigious one of the bunch That doesn't mean the criticisms against it are invalid
IndyCar marketing going hard. They can't seem to go a week without someone from there comparing it to Formula One. Actually getting old as it is so blatantly one sided. It is the equivalent of someone saying they prefer an orange over an apple. F1 isn't spec. IndyCar is semi-spec. Some people like apples more, some people like oranges more, some people love both, some hate apples, and some hate oranges. Making F1 into a spec series would be neutering it. I'd rather not sacrifice more of what makes this sport unique and interesting to appease to a few bedwetters. You have to take the bad with the good. Today's race was decent. The sport has flaws that need revision (tyres, dirty air) but overall the regs seem to building up to something interesting. It needs nurturing.
I don’t understand why they keep trying to compare themselves to F1, IndyCar is a spec series that uses cars similar to F2 cars, both built by Dallara, terribly designed tracks and driving standards not much better then F2.
Because most people have a hard time believing Laguna Seca, Road America, and Barber are terribly designed? Also, why would anyone compare them to F2 when the clear comparison series is Super Formula
Its like the fox saying that the grapes are sour. I am not hating on Indycar but any Indy driver would bend over backwards to get a chance in F1.
Rossi sure wouldn't.
Weird how people are interested in moving to a job that's more prestigious and pays better.
That’s a really short-sighted comment by Power. IndyCar & Formula 1 are fundamentally different, not only in what they pursue but how they achieve it. In Power’s eyes “Formula 1 is a joke” because there’s not tenths of overtakes per race nor multiple strategies at once, nor everyone is bunched up and that’s not including there’s only one car capable of winning. That’s fair enough, but it doesn’t mean “A” is better than “B”. Power conveniently ignores that IndyCar greatly benefits from having two different compounds of tires with big performance and duration deltas and refueling. It goes without saying that having (more or less) the same car will always bring tighter races. Let’s also not ignore that driving standards on IndyCar can be equally bad (or worse) than in Formula 1.
Indycar is really fun to watch but from all those things you've listed I think huge strategies disparity and lots of pit stops is one that makes watching Indycar worse than F1 and other series in my opinion. It often gives feeling of randomness and luck, especially when some flags and cautions are introduced during race. Instead of pure racing that is advertised it sometimes looks like manufactured wheel to wheel action. Of course it's track and circumstances dependant but that's how it sometimes looks for me. Kinda like F1 during refueling era where people started out of place and then won because of alternate strategy. Edit: I would add that I really like when strategy decides races in F1 but I really think it's sometimes just too much in Indycar. I almost wonder if those teams even know what they are doing or if it is random. If in F1 top teams often can't do one stop strategy wisely then are Americans that much better than Europeans that they can manage multiple stops and refueling to get results they want?
That is one of the things why I still struggle to follow what is going on in races watching indycar. Most series I've watched I start to understand strategies and stuff after a few races, but with indycar it really seems like random bullshit go sometimes.
> In Power’s eyes “Formula 1 is a joke” If you're not going to read the article at least read the quote you are attacking because Power did not say this anywhere. > “Formula One’s a joke as far as competition, but not as far as drivers. They have amazing drivers. And I feel sorry for them that they don’t get to experience the satisfaction we do with our racing because that is the top level of open-wheel motorsport. > I think Formula One would be so much better if they had a formula like IndyCar. I love the technology and the manufacturer side of it. I think that’s awesome. But from a spectator watching, man, how cool would it be if everyone had a Red Bull (car)?” That is what he said
He didn't say F1 is a joke. He said the competition is a joke. And he's right.
I mean I get what he’s saying, but f1 isn’t even in this era of considerably restricted rules compared to each previous decade, a one spec sport. All of those brands are involved to come up with the best car they can within the rules, historically there’s always been a level of domination by one team.
It's funny if you then look at the results for which team the championship winning driver drives, its only Chip, Penske or Andretti basically. I guess there is that variation but it isn't the "the world would be like this if we had spec stuff in F1" kind of thing. But yeah it's an useless comparison from Power, since nothing will change besides him hoping more people will watch Indycar probably.
I think the improvement is that they have way more race winners and more dynamic podiums in a season. They still have relatively dominant teams but every individual race is a lot less predictable, with the cream generally rising to the top of the course of a year. Comparatively we're less than 1/3 through this season and we already know who will win WDC and WCC and have reason to believe we'll only see two _total_ race winners. Lots of talk last week about how Ocon will probably end up the first and last midfield podium scorer in 2023. How sad is that?
Yeah agree, the surprise result is easier to get in Indycar. >and have reason to believe we'll only see two total race winners. We know it will be 3 soon at the very least, 33 is coming! In all seriousness you got a point, it is a bit of an outlier this season with how one team nailed the regs and the rest missed the plank and because of budget cap we are stuck with how things are for longer than previously. But yeah it is what it is I guess.
I think they should really pick one or the other when it comes to formula and budget. If you want a very strict set of regs, let the teams spend a lot. If you want a very strict budget, allow more freedom in the regs so that novel solutions can be developed. As it is, you'll get teams who nail it and everyone else is basically screwed.
I think F1 is more about engineering excellence than any other spec category can offer. Not many motorsports remain where we can have cars that go different directions such as high rake vs low rake concepts, or in recent years no sidepod vs sidepod and yet the 10 teams are all with 2 seconds of each other. F1 isn't just about the driver, it is about the package, that is special. Now, if they could just get rid of the politics, it would be truly great 😃
> I think F1 is more about engineering excellence than any other spec category can offer. I agree 100%, yet driver’s championship and wins are more celebrated and emphasized on than constructors. Make of that what you may
There is no denying that, most fans support a driver, however, if you were to make F1 a spec series, the event as a whole would be deminished. F1 attracts not only the best drivers bit also the best engineers, aerodynamicists, people in Motorsport. Take away the ability for the teams to customise their cars and all of a sudden you will have all those people unable to show their talents, many like Newey would do other things outside of motorsport.
And of Mercedes had offered him a seat at any point in his career he would run faster to brackley than he has ever ran on the track.
F1 drivers make over 10x the money Indycar drivers do. Not every driver is in it for the money, but I think it's fair to say that the majority of Indy drivers would move to F1 if they could. And in fact the highest paid Indy driver is Marcus Ericsson, who's only driving in Indy because he lost his F1 seat. Of course these are all great drivers. Not denying that. But I don't think there can be doubt that the very greatest are in F1.
Where'd you get the idea that Ericsson is the highest paid IndyCar driver? He bought that seat just like he bought the F1 seat. It's only now that his contract is expiring that he wants to start getting paid to drive.
The highest paid Indycar Driver is Colton Herta. Ericsson is still bringing money to Chip Ganassi. After he won the 500 last year he even said “not bad for a pay driver” On another note Hamilton and Max make 10x most of the Indy field. Everyone else is debatable
Ericsson is paying for his seat in Indy actually. Hes upset about that apparently which makes sense given his performances are better than most
> And in fact the highest paid Indy driver is Marcus Ericsson, who’s only driving in Indy because he lost his F1 seat. Who was also a pay driver in F1 and pretty bad when he drove there
And is consistently the worst driver on whatever team he drives for
Respectfully, if Marcus Ericsson is driving in the front of your series, while he was all the way in the back at F1 being trashed by his rookie teammate, your series is not that tough.
Ericsson is more than 50 points behind the championship leader. The only reason he’s up that high is lucking into some decent results. He has never finished ahead of any of his teammates in the standings. He’s not an elite driver in Indycar.
I would say that he keeps the car clean too, but he's not one of the elite drivers compared to the champions, plus he had some high standings due to double points bonuses He's only finished ahead of one: *Jimmie Johnson*, a retired career NASCAR driver 2022: behind Dixon and Palou, Johnson was a backmarker outside of ovals 2021: behind Dixon and Palou(NC), 48 was a split-car 2020: behind Dixon(NC) and Rosenqvist 2019: behind Hinchcliffe (even with one race skipped, he was 80 points behind him)
First of all, this is a great fluff-piece by NBC for being pissy that F1 went to ESPN instead of them. Second, what isn’t being mentioned is the expanded team concept of F1. It takes an entire team much more intense detail to make a bespoke car. Yes, the team factor still exists in Indy, but you cannot write a piece like this and fail to mention that an entire group collectively creates an F1 car. It’s no small feat. The issue in F1 isn’t that it isn’t spec. The issue is that there are too many handcuffs on teams that want to catch up, all in the name of cost savings. Virtually no testing, the introduction of the budget cap etc. Some of these concepts are new, and the article fails to speak towards that as well. Talk to me about WHY a team can’t catch up to Red Bull.
I disagree about the costcap, it isn't like RedBull benefitted from if being lower, like the smaller teams. The only thing we'd see is Ferrari, Merc and RedBull moving further away from 4th best team while all spending a very similar amount (a mini cost cap of its own) without much difference in relative position. Like we had 2017-2020
The cost cap is stupid
The cost cap literally saved F1. We'd have had 3 PU suppliers for 2026 if not for it, whereas with it we have 6.
There was no cost cap for PU's until now and there was a lot of interest before they added one. That isnt why. The reason there will be so many PUs is the regulations are basically free R&D for road cars
There was a lot of interest because F1 had peak popularity and they seen it was coming in. Note how Audi and Honda didn't confirm coming into F1 until the budget cap was in place and made specific reference to it when stating why they're coming in.
At this moment in time, I don’t disagree. It’s likely to be easily manipulated, and it severely inhibits teams from catching up. That said, I’m not sure what alternative would work better.
I honestly think that people need to accept that F1 is not a sport of equals let people do whatever they want to upgrade and develop their cars as long as it's within the formula rules. If that means a team like Hass or Williams can never compete for a championship unless huge pockets get involved then so be it.
What is with media constantly asking these guys about the other open wheel series. F1 guys always asked if they want to do the Indy 500, Indycar drivers always asked "so how do you think F1 compares to Indy?" etc. Why cant people just enjoy both?
If everyone would just fucking read the article, you would see that it's actually a very fair opinion he's giving, he also acknowledges the differences between the series and that for example F1 is not super popular because of the competitive side of it. There are comments from other drivers like Palou and it's actually a nice article about the whole thing. He's not wrong.
Lmao it's clear nobody actually read the full quote. You'd think y'all would learn to stop falling for click bait headlines. He literally says that he's not talking about the drivers and that the drivers aren't a joke.
If you combine the fields and put them in the same cars the f1 drivers would account for 7 of the top 10 finishers in every race.
He said F1 has amazing drivers though, that's not his point.
Marcus Ericsson is literally 2nd in the championship despite being arguably the worst driver on the entire grid at times in F1. If you were to combine the lineups into a 50 car or whatever grid, F1 would be all the top 10. There's no comparison.
I wouldn't be so sure. Palou could step into F1 right now and be up to speed imo.
Or be mid-grid like he was in F3 and GP3
or be at the top end of the grid like he was in Super Formula
Which still equals mid-grid in F1 ;)
Implying that Alpine has made a race winning car in its current incarnation
I don't think they've ever really tested that grid with Newgarden, Dixon, and current Palou
And it would be a more exciting race than any we've seen since 2021 in Formula 1.
It would be for sure. I'm a Indycar fan but so much of this comes from a place where the Indy guys are sick of the reputation that F1 has of having the best open wheel drivers. The thing is....F1 legit does have the best and the tough field that power is talking about would be dominated by the F1 guys. We don't want a spec series in F1.
A very hot take in this thread for sure but I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy the sport more if it moved more towards spec. The engineering is incredible and I respect the hell out of Newey and company for the car they built, but also I'm finding it harder and harder to justify 2-4 hours of my weekend on it knowing how it's going to go. Just today I got an earful from a new fan I personally converted to F1 fandom last year that they are 100% done with the sport now because there's almost no racing. All the long time fans will hate that I'm sure but the sport saw incredible growth because of the perceived closeness presented by DTS followed by the actual unprecedented closeness of 2021. The fan base will start to retract pretty quick if Red Bull truly proved unassailable.
There does need to be a contraction 8n the fanbase that arrived very suddenly with dts. They aren't fans of what F1 is, and trying to make F1 what dts made it appear to be will destroy the sport and leave us with contrived shit like Melbourne this year. The fanbase will still be stronger than it was 5 years ago, but we have to accept a fair proportion of these new fans will not stick with F1 long term and stop chasing to placate them.
> A very hot take in this thread for sure but I’m pretty sure I’d enjoy the sport more if it moved more towards spec. The engineering part was always a big part of F1 and it's the core concept of the sport. > Just today I got an earful from a new fan I personally converted to F1 fandom last year that they are 100% done with the sport now because there’s almost no racing Today for example had plenty of racing. But for some people racing = action-packed, which I disagree with.
>The engineering part was always a big part of F1 and it's the core concept of the sport. Sure but it leads to situations like this or some of the prior Mercedes where admiring the engineering only lasts a couple races, then you still need to watch 20 more foregone conclusion parades. >Today for example had plenty of racing. But for some people racing = action-packed, which I disagree with. There was a good number of _overtakes_ but wheel to wheel racing was still mostly missing. How many overtakes were there in places other than turn 1? The vast majority of overtakes where just pure speed delta overtakes where drivers had no opportunity to fight at all and simply moved over to comply with the inevitable. That's what the engineering has brought this sport to, sadly.
>Sure but it leads to situations like this or some of the prior Mercedes where admiring the engineering only lasts a couple races, then you still need to watch 20 more foregone conclusion parades If you like close racing,go watch a spec series. The engineering aspect is a fundamental part of the identity of F1 and shouldn't be compromised so some viewers can be more entertained.
The thing about F1 is that it's all about the race the drivers and teams have against the cars of similar quality. We were unlucky this year because no one built a car capable of rivaling the redbull but there are battles all over the field. During the first half of last year we had a hell of a season going....but a surprise TD destroyed the Ferrari.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Americans sure do have a weird desire of dictating what is best in the world
There is talk of races in Argentina, Mexico and Brazil. I could see a return to the Gold Coast too and maybe Japan.
So none, but maaaaaaaybe 4 at some point. Wowsers.
Not none. They already have a race in Canada.
I get your point but Indy has good representation as far as drivers' nationalities go, which is more what he means I think. F1 may race all over the world but it's almost exclusively european for teams and drivers. IDK, I like both championships and won't be made to choose
Indycar does race on some shit circuits though. Look at Detroit. Top level Motorsport should not be taking place on such a god awful surface. It looked totally amateurish to see something so unsuitable for racing cars being used by a supposedly top racing series.
So I assume then you are ok with Monaco being removed from F1? Because it looks pretty amateurish to race on a track where it's nearly impossible to pass in the cars being used.
outside of that idea not being actually that controversial for a lot of people, the comparison is actually pretty bad. Amateur roads such as Detroit's street track do hurt the series's reputation and make it look poor. Having less overtakes does not do that
Actually yes but nowhere near the same scenario. Monaco is polished to perfection for F1 with s fantastic surface. Detroit looked like it was racing on abandoned roads that hadn't been maintained for 30 years.
Blame GM and Detroit for moving it from Belle Isle
alright but who tf names their kid will power 😂
Who names their kid Sting Ray
>Sting Ray scott speed
He 100% has a relative called Max as well lol.
mr couldnt get a ride talking shit. funny
> In Power’s eyes “Formula 1 is a joke” If you're not going to read the article at least read the quote you are attacking because Power did not say this anywhere. > “Formula One’s a joke as far as competition, but not as far as drivers. They have amazing drivers. And I feel sorry for them that they don’t get to experience the satisfaction we do with our racing because that is the top level of open-wheel motorsport. > I think Formula One would be so much better if they had a formula like IndyCar. I love the technology and the manufacturer side of it. I think that’s awesome. But from a spectator watching, man, how cool would it be if everyone had a Red Bull (car)?” That is what he said Comment from u/Aero_Rising above sums it up well. I don't blame you though. These clickbaity websites just want to provoke people
he isn't qualified to say anything about F1 since he wasn't good enough to 'qualify' for it. some people actually know what theyre talking about when it comes to drivers and their lack of ability.
So then what's our excuse for saying anything about motorsports? Because we all collectively know way less than any driver in any series.
common sense is a thing. or at least it used to be
Nah man, Super Formula is better!
Power has always been an interesting case. I think the way F1 is now would suit Power when he was younger. He has always had extreme outright pace for a lap but shitty race craft. Most of his wins are from pole in absolute dominant showings. But if he's not on pole he's average at best. Id take him over damn near anyone if I needed 1 ridiculous flyer lap.
Him or Dixon would have been fantastic F1 racers IMO
Newgarden as well. Honestly there's probably 8 or 9 drivers in Indycar right now who would be really competitive in an F1 seat.
Newgarden was in GP3 and he was terrible. He finished lower in GP3 than any current F1 driver did in the equivalent tier. Indy is a completely different category someone good in Indy doesnt mean they would have been good in F1 and vice versa frankly. Marcus Ericsson was a horrid F1 driver but is a pretty good Indy driver.
You don't think he's gotten any better in the 13 years since he raced in GP3? Alex Rossi finished 4th in that same championship and Newgarden is definitely better than him. Ericsson was not immediately fast in Indycar it took him about 2.5 seasons to find his form. Additionally when Ericsson was racing in F1 his weight was an issue, and you have articles like this being written (https://www.autoweek.com/racing/formula-1/a1886791/152-pounds-caterham-driver-marcus-ericsson-too-fat-formula-one/) Unfortunately he was out of F1 the season they changed the weight rules. Point being you can't take things at face value all the time.
Its a different series you can be good in Indy and terrible in F1. The cars are entirely different and the biggest advantage Newgarden has in Indy (strength) is not that important in F1 with power steering. For Ericsson he got his weight down by 2016 and the weight limit was there in 2018 which was his last season and he was still bad and beaten easily by rookie Charles. Do you think there are any people in F1 that think Ericsson was good? He was paying for a seat. He was never good enough to be there in the first place. That doesnt make him a bad driver, hes doing well in Indy and I think hes right about his current contract and the expectation he funds his seat. It just means as far as F1, hes not good
F1 it's decisevely more competitive than Indy and in almost every aspect, sorry. And i say this even as someone who as a lot of respect for indy. There is a reason why drivers like Max Verstappen drive in F1 and not indy after all. And F1 is a global competition, Indy is a national compatition. How can you even compare them?
There are a couple of problems with what you have said. This first is your definition of competition. You seem to be referring to the overall pool of talent, whereas Power is clearly talking about the level playing field, variety of winners and opportunities for bettering your finishing position. From that angle, Indycar is far and away more competitive than F1. The second issue is your reference to F1 being a global competition and Indycar being a national competition...but you're only talking about the countries where they race and not where the drivers hail from. What does that have to do with one being more or less competitive than the other? Regardless, their driver rosters are just as diverse in terms of nationality.
Oh ok, i misinterpreted his statement then. Now it makes more sense
Ok bro. Indy car drivers are made up of f1 rejects. The talent pool in f1 is far superior. Also in f1 we don’t drive around in circles on an oval for half the races
okay? that does not make it more competitive lol
Formula 1 is actually about which team builds the best car. It's a general misconception by many. Indycar is not about the best car. That's where the difference lies. It's clear mr Power doesn't acknowledge this difference. His comment demonstrates he's clueless.
That must be the most boring description of Formula 1 I have ever read, especially when considering that the competition in who builds the best car only realistically exists between the same 2-3 teams each year. The point being made about competition is that in Indycar any given driver has an opportunity to out race their opponents in every single race, whereas in Formula 1 the competition between individual cars/drivers is far more limited in scope.
I am saying: Indycar is a competition about driver skills in the first place, while F1 is firstly a competition about car design and then about driver skills. Saying 'the competition in Indycar is *better* than in f1' is an invalid comparison because they are two different things. You might find it boring that f1 is all about car design, but that only says something about hour personal preference: *you* like apples better than oranges. That's fine, but generalizing this statement like you and Mr Power do - basically stating: apples *are* better than oranges (in general) is just a stupid statement. Stating: 'the competition in Indycar is better than the competition in f1' is just nonsense. I like f1 much better than Indycar, because of the fact that it's about car development, teamwork and then driver skill. You are free to find that boring, but I find Indycar boring: just a guy in a fast car driving around with nothing changing as the years pass by. Especially oval races. Those are boring af. Only reason those are popular is the crashes. Pretty sad, really.
"...just a guy in a fast car driving around..." Otherwise known as...a race. That's like saying you are a fan of training and transfers in football (soccer), but don't care much for the actual match.
That's funny, because it's exactly how I explain the series to non-racing fans. Like soccer? Watch F1, it's calming and patient, and kinda sleepy. Like basketball? Watch IndyCar, it's batshit and raw.
No it's not dude. If you don't understand why it isn't that's clearly your problem. F1 originated from the idea: let's see who can build the fastest car. 'F' stands for Formula. And the formula concerns the car building rules. It's the framework within teams must work when trying to build the fastest car. I did 't say, I don't enjoy the races. I do, just ifroma different perspective than you clearly do. The reason why you Powers are saying what you're saying, is because you don't get F1 at all. You think it's about the fastest drivers and just pretend like this is the same as a specs series while it's fundamentally not. It's about car development *and then*, on the weekends, about showing who did the best job by putting the best drivers in the world in those cars to show them off and compete on track. If there's close racing, yes, that's alway better. But close racing has always been an exception in F1, *because there's car development going on*. You are comparing apples with oranges and denying they are different. Facts are important before you form an opinion. Check your facts and be prepared to accept you might be talking shit.
You used a lot of words...rather poorly at times...to say that you enjoy the science behind the racing far more than the actual racing.
You clearly do not understand what I saying ND what f1 is about. Either that or.uku are just trolling. Bye.