Purist vs Spectacle?

[bhall]

Having previously identified myself as a "purist" in the past who decried the "artificial" nature of F1, I've come to realize that I don't like those terms at all. For one thing, they seem to be very divisive words. Moreover, they're also inaccurate labels for all but the most die-hard, laissez faire F1 dreamers. Whether that's an evolution on my part or not, I have no idea.

I just know that there will never be a time when F1 even approaches a resemblance of the pictures I have in my head. It would be both expensive and very unsafe. Beyond that, the chances of such a materialization are so infinitesimally small that's it's really quite pointless to even allow the desire to take hold. I'm pragmatic enough to recognize reality for what it is.

That said, I still don't like where F1 is these days, nor do I particularly care for the path upon which it seems to be moving. It's the gimmicks; I can't stand them. F1 is recasting its image with stopgap measures, because no one appears to be willing to make any tough decisions regarding the future of the sport.

It makes no sense to talk about road relevance and DRS in the same sentence, yet it happens. It also doesn't make sense to talk about fuel efficiency in light of heavily restricted KERS regulations, yet that's the reality. Deriding the role of aerodynamics in F1 while expecting F1-level performance without it is equally nonsensical. And it's maddening to hear talk of an urgent need to cut costs while FOM fees continue to escalate and price everyday fans out of the equation. These are but a few of the inconsistencies, both large and small, that appear to grow exponentially every time a new dollar is added to the coffer.

I'm not so naive as to think that such politicking is new to F1. But, I am approaching the limit of my tolerance for it nonetheless.

[myurr]

Completely agree with both the previous two posts. And having now thought about the labels a bit more there would definitely need to be at least a third category for those of us who love wheel to wheel racing even if we dislike the gimmicks F1 currently relies upon to try and provide that. Which brings us up to Technologist (maybe Engineer) vs Racer vs Spectacle. And I'm sure there are many other variants along the spectrum.

[Cam]

Somehow a lot of people are mixing up their definition of "purist" and "spectacle" with what's happening this year.

I agree that the terms are difficult to define, which is why this thread was started, to try and figure that out. F1 is and always has been a mix of racing and thrills however it also has a completely other side that no other sport does - technical. Hard core football fans are not engrossed in the physical training regimes and physio sessions and eating plans the players have - unlike F1, where every minor change, adjustment and feature of a car, team and tools is discussed quite openly both in specific forums and in the greater media. Fans know about the technical aspect of the cars and our coverage on TV here goes into depth about it race - this to me go towards defining the 'purist' of F1 and what we enjoy.

F1 is packaged and sold as a prototype series and last year when I saw a Lotus with forward facing exhausts, I could understand that label of prototype and even though the Lotus did not perform, it was wonderful to see a car take a completely unique approach. What other series would that occur in? None. This is what a 'purist' loves to see in F1.

Banned. Restricted. Controlled. These are the buzz words of F1. If they are in place for safety, okay, but they're not. Everyone is so scared one team will romp away with every race that the sport has and is now essentially a stock car event. Would a 'purist' be happy with this? I had to do exams each year to keep up an accreditation. The pass mark was 86%. The majority of people failed. Instead of bringing the level of people up, they dropped the pass mark to 72%. They dumbed down the requirements to make everyone happy. Did this mean everyone was good - no, it meant 'average' was acceptable. F1 cannot continue to call itself elite while it does exactly the same thing and as a 'purist' I think this is also part of F1 and something which has gone from the sport.

No-one wants a crap show, however if F1 continues on this path, it won't be F1 anymore. Stock engines for all cars, stock tyres for all cars, exact dimensions to follow, rules that label every innovation as 'moveable aero' - breeds average cars - and yes, that opens up the field so anyone can win, but the title won't mean the same thing as it did.

As a 'purist' this is what we see F1 has lost. It's now so lost up it's own ar$e trying to be a circus selling tickets to a show, rather than trying, at least trying, to stay true to what F1 originally was.

I guess watching F1 now is no different to INDY cars. It's exactly the same event and premise - couple of manufactures and stock engines, stock tyres, stock dimensions and yes, customer cars.

[FrukostScones]

Somehow a lot of people are mixing up their definition of "purist" and "spectacle" with what's happening this year.

I agree that the terms are difficult to define, which is why this thread was started, to try and figure that out. F1 is and always has been a mix of racing and thrills however it also has a completely other side that no other sport does - technical. Hard core football fans are not engrossed in the physical training regimes and physio sessions and eating plans the players have - unlike F1, where every minor change, adjustment and feature of a car, team and tools is discussed quite openly both in specific forums and in the greater media. Fans know about the technical aspect of the cars and our coverage on TV here goes into depth about it race - this to me go towards defining the 'purist' of F1 and what we enjoy.

F1 is packaged and sold as a prototype series and last year when I saw a Lotus with forward facing exhausts, I could understand that label of prototype and even though the Lotus did not perform, it was wonderful to see a car take a completely unique approach. What other series would that occur in? None. This is what a 'purist' loves to see in F1.

Banned. Restricted. Controlled. These are the buzz words of F1. If they are in place for safety, okay, but they're not. Everyone is so scared one team will romp away with every race that the sport has and is now essentially a stock car event. Would a 'purist' be happy with this? I had to do exams each year to keep up an accreditation. The pass mark was 86%. The majority of people failed. Instead of bringing the level of people up, they dropped the pass mark to 72%. They dumbed down the requirements to make everyone happy. Did this mean everyone was good - no, it meant 'average' was acceptable. F1 cannot continue to call itself elite while it does exactly the same thing and as a 'purist' I think this is also part of F1 and something which has gone from the sport.

No-one wants a crap show, however if F1 continues on this path, it won't be F1 anymore. Stock engines for all cars, stock tyres for all cars, exact dimensions to follow, rules that label every innovation as 'moveable aero' - breeds average cars - and yes, that opens up the field so anyone can win, but the title won't mean the same thing as it did.

As a 'purist' this is what we see F1 has lost. It's now so lost up it's own ar$e trying to be a circus selling tickets to a show, rather than trying, at least trying, to stay true to what F1 originally was.

I guess watching F1 now is no different to INDY cars. It's exactly the same event and premise - couple of manufactures and stock engines, stock tyres, stock dimensions and yes, customer cars.

your post shows that you don't know the rules very well.

[myurr]

I think you're still struggling to see past the labels and definitions. As someone who loves the purity of wheel to wheel racing between two or more human drivers at the absolute top of their game, I consider myself a purist. I love that the cars are the fastest on the planet and feature some of the most advanced technologies, but for me that is just a backdrop to the driver vs driver battle.

I could make a case that this is true of most people - the driver's championship is the one that carries the most prestige after all, even if the teams claim its the constructors that matters to them. The media and popular press focus much more on the inter driver rivalry rather than the technology. People tend toe talk about a driver winning a race rather than a car or team.

So I stand by my assertion that rather than purist vs spectacle, it should be engineer vs racer vs spectacle. There is nothing more pure about being interested in the cars than being interested in the drivers. But even there no one will fall directly into any of those buckets, it's a gradual scale between all three.

[mx_tifoso]

Just to see what the sport is becoming more and more, check out this quote from Martin Whitmarsh:

They obviously don't have blankets in other formulae and provided that the temperature and pressure range of the tyres are okay, it does seem a fairly pointless exercise to spend so much money on blankets and having noisy generators on the grid. Better to save the space and have more room for VIPs and media!

GrandPrix - Tyre warmers to go amid F1 cost-cutting?

Yes, the VIP's and media are what this series needs to focus on, right? Were it up to me I would ban celebs and that crap from the garages.

[Just_a_fan]

It's already there. This is at Monaco during qualifying. It's obvious that far too many of these people have no interest in F1 or they'd be watching the cars qualify!!

[Red Schneider]

I would agree they have no interest in the racing. It looks like a horrible place to dine to boot given the noise level. Many of them are even wearing earplugs. Does that look like a nice place to dine?

More interested in being seen.

[mx_tifoso]

I know that, but at least that's not within the racing environment, which is what I'm referring to. aka the garages and pitlane.

If that's a restaurant or whatever, fine.

[krisfx]

In reply to whoever said about banned etc being buzzwords.


The "purist" in me loves to see the very clever engineering what goes into finding the extra pace when regulations are so tight. Completely unrestricting F1 would end up in stupidity. And all the cars would eventually look the same anyway. The spectacle so to speak for me is the fact that I now feel I can talk about a sport I love in public, with the excitement drawing in people who don't care about the sport, a few years back if you spoke about F1 where I live people would give you the same old "cars in circles" reply.

I say this time and time again regarding "stock car style of F1" - unrestrict > one team dominates > every team moves to that style and emulates it > therefore most cars end up with a similar approach to the winning solution.

[Cam]

Just to see what the sport is becoming more and more, check out this quote from Martin Whitmarsh:

They obviously don't have blankets in other formulae and provided that the temperature and pressure range of the tyres are okay, it does seem a fairly pointless exercise to spend so much money on blankets and having noisy generators on the grid. Better to save the space and have more room for VIPs and media!

GrandPrix - Tyre warmers to go amid F1 cost-cutting?

Yes, the VIP's and media are what this series needs to focus on, right? Were it up to me I would ban celebs and that crap from the garages.

With the obvious and quite blunt push to make F1 more of a 'show', there's probably no need for these items. The Pirelli tyres probably work better without them anyways

The above Monaco shot was showing the 'wannabe seen' crowd and F1 has always had that and I, for one, like that. F1 is prestigious and elite so one would expect to see the rich and beautiful. I except that they have no idea what they're seeing.

It'll be very, very interesting to see what comes of the new cost cutting agreement (still waiting thanks to the extension). If they take away all the things that differentiate F1 from other categories, then is it still F1?

With Vodafone weighing up it's investment in Mclaren at the moment and the whole 'greasy palms' thing, maybe stripping back the 'show' and just get on with some sweet racing - is the best medicine for everyone.

[SeijaKessen]

I've been engaged in conversations with several regarding the current state of F1.

This topic is not meant to be about solutions, but rather it's about trying to understand why such a large number of people on this forum, or even elsewhere seem to think the current incarnation of Formula One racing in 2012 is actually a good thing.

There's several areas that people who think this season is fantastic like, not all of them, but sometimes one or two, or all.

-Engine restrictions
-DRS
-Pirelli tires
-Other restrictions

What I am unable to fathom, is why people have this huge need for overtaking to occur in races.

F1 from a pure historical perspective has always been about processional racing, for better or for worse.

Yes, you do get overtaking at times, and great battles, but the focus was never about the need for constant overtaking.

Nor was it about trying to restrict the playing field in such a manner, technical ingenuity has been stifled so tremendously.

Yet, people think these are all good things.

All of these things that have conspired to give us the 2012 season are enjoyed by plenty here.

What I am asking, is why are these things good, when they go in the face of everything F1 stood for for many years? If you had such a problem with processional racing, and everything that comes with it, why did you not just opt to watch any of the various spec-races that exist?

[strad]

Many wonder similar things.
I think in large part it's because the audience is now so young and doesn't recall anything before 1990 or so.
AS with most things I consider bad in F1, it's Bernie's fault.

[Pup]

I think it's just an indication of an ADD audience that can't concentrate on a race for longer than three laps.

But really the division is simply between those who view F1 primarily as entertainment, and those who view it primarily as sport.

[strad]

too true Pup..too true