F you Bernie! from the USA

[BreezyRacer]

Its amazing how people get so agrivated about the F1 / NASCAR issue. For example, Brezzeyracer posted on the first page of this topic a retaliation to people talking down about American intelligence. And I agree with him, its not right to do so. BUT, in his post he said "I bet when silverstone gets the axe the agerage Brit IQ will drop by 30", well I'd like to point out that not everybody posting against NASCAR was a Brit, and also why not comment on the French, their IQ levels and the loss of the race at Magny-Cours? Because its not right to do so. It's that sort of silly, angry, and bigotted retort that gives people the impression that all ANSCAR fan's are stupid"

Sorry Spencifer .. that arguement was an tongue in cheek attempt to point out the absurdity that US auto fans are too stupid for F1. I only mentioned brits and Silverstone because it has long been on Bernie's chopping block .. nothing against the brits really. I could have made the same arguement about France of course.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

Ahhh ok cool, sorry then BreezyRacer, lol.

About the track changes I dunno if they should keep that new laout for F1 if it returns. Usually Bike tracks include a chicane to reduce speeds further than in F1 (i.e that T1,2,3 complex by the banked corner) I dunno if they'd use that for F1. The other change though, at what used to be T10 & 11, that looks good. Not quite so mickey mouse.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

EDIT: Sorry double post!

[mrmr]

I did read that the new layout was Tilke/FIA approved for F1 before they made the changes. I don't see anything for the pit lane layout which would have to change. Ralph's nemisis is gone! Any drivers out there have an opinion on the passing options? I think the infield will be more interesting in this reverse direction.

[checkered]

I read through the

whole thread (which took some doing) and have to say that it isn't my personal impression that F1 is somehow "regional" or "European" ... by geographical and genealogical criteria the sport is actually more British than anything else, but even that proposition can be countered by sound arguments. Personally, I'm as troubled by F1's failure to establish itself in the US as I am by its rampant expansion to countries where tax proceeds would serve better purposes when placed elsewhere, were it not for the obvious lack of democratic means to control public spending caused by dire sociocultural disparities and an elitist attitude amongst the ruling classes.

Private business, in a democratic and legal framework, is where F1 should thrive and if it isn't so there are clear and dangerous disconnects in how the sport relates to the economical, ecological and societal environment it exists in. And the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, as far as I've understood, is a completely private, profit driven business that does no half measures with regard to major investments and undertakings such as F1. And yet a deal proved unworkable. Maybe the general public/businessmen in the US are right in being wary of certain aspects of F1 and/or conforming to those. This could give pause to the car manufacturers involved, for the series can't serve their purposes for long if it continues to project an image that favours cronyism over democracy, free enterprise and sustainability. One needs to move to new markets with a certain aggression, but with an acute understanding of where that force is directed at.

Those with a more cynical mindset might take me for a fool for saying this, but to me, "getting away with it" doesn't make it OK - in a very profound sense. I believe that "getting away with it" is only the very minimum of attainable personal profit compared to realising and achieving true mutual benefit. The sport and business of F1 has many potential strengths and values that are most human, and that’s something that I admire. Part of its beauty is that this isn't about pure survivalist necessity but a venue where our imaginations can be put to use to improve things and (indeed) enjoyed on a grander scale. That larger global developments and crises infringe on that liberty is a challenge for F1 that can prove its triumph or its downfall. I’m not advocating a view here that F1 should altruistically reflect every moral high ground achievable – I’m only questioning whether the current trends are even sustainable in practice, in the long term. There’s quite some irony in Ecclestone stating that the US isn’t “vital” for F1, as it’s abundantly clear that F1 certainly isn’t “vital” for the US. Who, exactly, should be proving his worth here?

A quite a sizable percentage of posters here on F1T seem to originate from the "Americas". That alone speaks against certain stereotypes being flaunted around, be it in jest or not. Equally, there seem to be almost unrecognisable preconceptions of what being an European entails. For those expressing doubts about the science of global warming I can only suggest contrasting your misgivings and arguments expressly, directly and rigorously with the already available information and the sources where it originates from. That will also help to distinguish between real measures we can take and the inevitable charlatans that are always enticed by growing volumes of resources placed somewhere.

If looking more closely into environmental sciences is a stretch (as is generally the case, if not for anything else but for the lack of time, many have their share of immediate things to attend to), I still hope that no-one takes to behaviour that propagates acting wastefully as an expression of solidarity in their culture and/or society. The US has a huge talent pool and magnificent resources to assess and act on global environmental issues but lately the political oscillations have exhibited the sort of an intensifying interference in amplitude that has hampered some efforts in wider co-operation. Part of the impetus for that oscillation has been (all too obviously) external, part of it internal, part intentional and part just plain accidental. But I haven’t seen evidence of any larger disconnect between continents and nations in relevant and pressing issues – the true differences lie in far less obvious alignments, in my humble opinion and this is not the place to discuss those.

But back to the USGP. In Speed’s “Wind Tunnel” show Bob Varsha, the channel’s F1 host, while discussing the failed negotiations between Ecclestone and George described the sport’s finances as both “byzantine” and as “the black hole of international motorsports” – admittedly among more favourable adjectives describing other aspects of the sport and all the while expressing his desire to see F1 on US soil again asap. I’d like a swift, permanent and committed return too, for it might very well signal F1’s movement to the right direction – in more ways than one.

[Saribro]

I'm as troubled by F1's failure to establish itself in the US

USGP has the highest attendance of the season, so I wouldn't say F1 fails to establish itself or is unpopular in the US. Do people actually have any grounds for these claims of failure, or are they just repeating what the other guy said? (And I don't mean to sound provocative here, I really am interested to find out whether there is some indication of this lacking 'popularity')

[mx_tifoso]

I'm as troubled by F1's failure to establish itself in the US

USGP has the highest attendance of the season, so I wouldn't say F1 fails to establish itself or is unpopular in the US.

Well that might be the case, the highest attendance of the season, but since the U.S. is so big (geographicaly) the number of people interested in F1 compared to the entire U.S population is very small. Just as there is a large population, there is a large number, or variety of sports categories, ranging from motorsport to the ones played on a field.
Another problem, IMO, is the distance you have to cover to attend an F1 GP here in the country you live in. For example, if you live on the west coast, its quite a distance from there to the IMS. So I believe that is a problem for sure.

As to where a country like Germany, with a much smaller area relative to the U.S's, has many motorsport fans (F1)and therefore a much tighter comparison with its total population.

And a sport that is also struggling here in the U.S is football(soccer). I personally know a lot of people that like it, but comparing all these fans to the entire U.S population is ridiculous. It has similar struggles to F1 while trying to gain popularity among Americans. They both mainly remain "international" sports. Whereas "american football" and NASCAR have American roots, and maybe you can include baseball and basketball with them as well.

[checkered]

USGP has the highest attendance of the season, so I wouldn't say F1 fails to establish itself or is unpopular in the US. Do people actually have any grounds for these claims of failure, or are they just repeating what the other guy said? (And I don't mean to sound provocative here, I really am interested to find out whether there is some indication of this lacking 'popularity')

I wasn't referring to attendance, but the wider rationale of F1 existing in the US, in a democratic free market economy (with its own characteristics). But speaking of US attendance as a measure of popularity, it is different to the European one at least in terms of a superficial homogeneity (overall national identity, recognized national media brands and in essence a uniform language) of the marketplace i.e. there's a certain efficiency in attracting those interested enough to spend money.

Attract 2% of the market and that's 6.000.000 people, of which you need to convince about 3% or so to come to the actual race(s). On paper that should be a breeze compared to managing the distribution and advertising costs to over 490 million people in 27 countries and 23 (official) languages that make up the EU. Reflect on that, the popularity of F1 and especially attendance in Europe is astounding. Considering the populations of the US, Mexico and Canada, NA combined (~ 440 mil?) should also host 9 races per season. At this point, a total of four seems as optimistic as I can possibly get - and I won't even dare to calculate how many races Asia should host in direct proportion to population.

It is clear that F1 in itself can't race in the US most of the time. Not with a maximum of 20 races or so. I'm afraid that's the only way there'd be enough coverage and continuity for the sport to be picked up as the open wheel racing series. I can only imagine that we'd need a local proxy series in NA under the wings of which the "international cousin" could make a couple of succesful visits on their race weekends per year ... a feeder series roughly similar to GP2 but with an image that isn't very subordinate but rather parallel to F1 itself.

It could be called "Formula United States" or "Formula United States series", if only to have a catch phrase like "What's all the FUSs about?" or "See what all the FUSs is about" or ... well, you get my drift (Btw, I do claim intellectual property rights to all original material in my posts. Bernie, call me, you'll find me very reasonable ... ) ...

... either that, or we'd need a huge number of alternating circuits, roughly two times the maximum requirement per season (40 or so) spread evenly over Europe, the Americas and Asia, so each continent could host the mainpart (9 to 10) of the races in three year cycles. I'm afraid that'd be terribly expensive for the individual race organisers, though, and doesn't figure too well with the plans of some Mideast nations that have based their F1 strategies on some very elitist premises and the continued presence of the sport in their countries for the foreseeable future.

Is F1, in the end, being spread too thin as a truly international series? Perhaps not, in the dawning age of true interactivity and virtual realms, but right now one couldn't be blamed for thinking that.

[SZ]

checkered, two excellent, well-articulated posts on a number of levels.

many might fear that your hopes for the human and/or altruistic sides of F1 were dashed some time ago. as a fan of other motor racing series, you'd have to admit the image project is, as is stated in your post and others, on that is cold, prone to cronyism, unnecessarily elitist and out of touch with the very public that could best support it. certainly some recent decisions on where and how to to stage races are a little questionable to some.

a more pressing question is "what does F1 want to be in the US", possibly reinterpreted as "what do US fans want F1 to be in the US". is it going to be simply a stop on the way around the world for the self-proclaimed "pinnacle of motorports"? is it going to be a few stops, represented the geographically/by population the US represents a bigger potential market than some continents taken in by F1 currently? is it going to be a part of of F1 culture at all levels, a sport that US drivers aspire to, actively taking part in feeder series to gain a spot on the F1 grid?

clearly a holistic approach is needed, we can't have the entire cake. the US seems to have some very talented drivers at it's disposal that are already very happy in CART, IRL and the like (many US based fans might well regard CART and F1 "the two premier motorsports categories in the world"). and if you can't convince a driver that trading places from a top CART team to a back-of-grid F1 team at the peak of their careers is a good thing, you'll have trouble convincing their fans too. can F1 really displace the local formulas as the "pinnacle of motorsports" in the US? the cars can be proven to be faster under certain conditions, sure, and ferrari doesn't make cars for any other formula series, any child can understand that, but the holistic appeal of F1 - particularly the more human aspects - really does leave a bit to be desired against the current US offerings. and fans care. e.g. young fans - that grow into support for a particular category - care a lot.

clearly the holistic aspects of getting the US on board as a market need to be better addressed. you need presence, but you need more. you need relevant drivers, and the sport needs to be positioned appropriately in the market. if it not there's no use prattling on about "get 2% of the market" if 99.95% of the market isn't really convinced it's the "pinnacle of motorsport", "a leading formula category like our stuff but more international", or something else... that's clear, definitive and marketable.

this isn't the bike world. there's not a fan on the planet that doesn't understand that AMA is for the bikes you buy off the street and motoGP is the only place where the prototypes run, and that you need to be the best to get in. it really doesn't matter that EU riders tend to come through the lower GP classes whilst US and most australian based riders seemingly come through experience on bigger bikes. both are recognised as a way in, both as schools to competitive rides. hold a motogp bike race anywhere you want in the US and they will come, as fans and as a sport there is some "ownership" in the US.

what's F1 got to say by contrast? it turned at at indy to have the cars head the wrong way around proceedings, without really doing what indy was famous for over a complete lap with cars that looked outwardly very similar to those that defined the venue, with many drivers with weird names noone had heard of or was vaguely interested in (bar JPM) - travesty that, as JPM went back home and they got scott speed in a car not going to the front of the grid in a manner that makes a career. so much for having the market call some of the sport their own. enthusiasts aside, who'd really be interested? i'm with you checkered, F1 is to prove itself to the US at large, not the enthusiasts that'd turn up and watch a pitstop procession at rates between grovel and glee regardless.

and seriously, the "enthusiast" argument is complete crap. when you're a marketing machine the size of F1 that has every team pay the red people $40+m just for turning up, going to a region the size of the US and saying you're appealing to the "enthusiasts" or that "all we need is 2% because of the population size" is tantamount to saying "we've failed before we've started here". these people appreciate racing, they understand cars, the most significant automotive industry hub of the 20th century is on their land... if you can't make a major, developed, funded, fast racing series work in the US then it's time for a sit and rethink.

probably establishing a feeder category is a good thing, taking a second GP2 series to the US i'd vote for as a positive step in a long-term strategy. i'd personally hope this would lead to a US-based team or two. get on board, get involved.

and i hope for the effort you put into your post, checkered, that there's a fly on the wall working for the SLEC that's listening. with all he's done for F1 that's positive - and it is a lot - i don't doubt that BE is paying attention...

[TERRASTAR18]

ALL HE WANTS TO DO IS SUPPORT THAT PARIS HILTON DAUGter of his....HE is an idiot who doesn't realize the Us at worst in the next ten years will be the 4th largest market after China,EU and India. Instead of being hard on here and a legendary track like Silverstone, he should pressure Monaco to pay for new infrastructure like lights inthe tunnel and increasing the size of the track for more overtaking.

[checkered]

Well, at least Honda

is signalling the obvious, let's see how long it takes before other manufacturers follow suit. This is Fry's immediate reaction:

We're very disappointed indeed by the loss of Indy. The US is one of the most important markets ­and a global property such as Formula One needs to be represented in the biggest market where motor manufacturers are key players.

If we can't go back to Indy, we would urge an alternative venue as quickly as possible. Even if there were two or three races - one of each coast ­- we would still be very keen. It's a critical matter.

Excerpt from an autosport.com article, to be found in its entirety here.

[waynes]

can i just ask

is the united states off the calender? or just indy?

thanks

[modbaraban]

is the united states off the calender? or just indy?

There's no final calendar yet, AFAIK.

[checkered]

Now, it's a

choir of Fry, Howett and Horner already:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/60958

That didn't take long. Who's next?

[waynes]

There's no final calendar yet, AFAIK.

good point