Mercedes TV coveragegate

[AnthonyG]

Actually, if the car in front is too much in front and there's battle going on with midfield teams, why not?

It's better like this, only giving the cars ahead coverage only enlarges the budget differences.

[alexx_88]

Nobody, ever, in the history of sport, has turned on the TV to watch stuff that he already knows or he doesn't care about which, in this case, would be the superior performance of Merc's PUs.

Your bias is showing here. Merc fans are turning in and droves as where RBR fans when Vettel was winning every race.

Believe it or not, I am a Ferrari/Alonso fan, so I "suffered" through the Vettel/RB era. However, the difference between what was happening then and what is happening now is quite significant. There was nothing in the world (other than their own limits) that was stopping Ferrari from copying all the RB solutions. They were all in plain sight and development was unlimited. Moreover, the difference was only a couple of tenths, so each of RBs wins came after mostly flawless performances, both from the team and Vettel. Now compare all that to the Merc era. Granted, they've all agreed to the rules, but that doesn't make the current situation fair to F1. You have an engine manufacturer that, for almost 2 seasons, has been almost untouchable, racing 1s ahead for most races and only beaten when a lot of things went wrong. Moreover, their advantage is locked in through a token system that allows for PU changes only once per year (this season was a regulation loophole that has been fixed), so, as long as PU remains the dominant performance factor, what we have in Australia, we'll also have in Abu Dhabi. The token system doesn't really help reduce cost, imo. As long as one wealthy manufacturer is seriously behind, he'll use all its resources to claw its way back and the token system merely limits the time window when the pecking order changes. A free-for-all development for a number of years until all manufacturers reach a similar performance baseline would've been much better for the show and I can't really see how it would've been more expensive than what we have now. I'm pretty sure that, if you go to Maranello or Sakura, you'll see all their resources utilized to the max, as both Ferrari and Honda want to compete, whereas, on the other hand, Renault haven't even used their allowed tokens.

Getting back on subject, loosing a top-runner like RB will always be a loss. Less top teams, less top drivers, fewer close-call battles for top positions can only be bad for F1. To that extent, everyone is acting in their own interest while, funnily enough, Ecclestone's are probably the closest to the F1 fan's. Money is what fuels F1 to be great. That money comes from having a lot of fans, so we have to accept that you can't attract a lot of fans just with engine pictures and aero details. No, they want to see drama, uncertainty over who's going to win, driver's pushing their cars to the limit in close call battles ON TRACK, so F1 is going to have to compromise on this if it wants to stay relevant as a sport. That compromise needs to result in having more top teams in direct competition with each other. But hell, if that compromise means that we'll get a chance to watch the best drivers in the world drive their cars and battle it out on track, I'm all up for it!

[dans79]

Believe it or not, I am a Ferrari/Alonso fan, so I "suffered" through the Vettel/RB era. However, the difference between what was happening then and what is happening now is quite significant. There was nothing in the world (other than their own limits) that was stopping Ferrari from copying all the RB solutions. They were all in plain sight and development was unlimited. Moreover, the difference was only a couple of tenths, so each of RBs wins came after mostly flawless performances, both from the team and Vettel. Now compare all that to the Merc era. Granted, they've all agreed to the rules, but that doesn't make the current situation fair to F1. You have an engine manufacturer that, for almost 2 seasons, has been almost untouchable, racing 1s ahead for most races and only beaten when a lot of things went wrong. Moreover, their advantage is locked in through a token system that allows for PU changes only once per year (this season was a regulation loophole that has been fixed), so, as long as PU remains the dominant performance factor, what we have in Australia, we'll also have in Abu Dhabi. The token system doesn't really help reduce cost, imo. As long as one wealthy manufacturer is seriously behind, he'll use all its resources to claw its way back and the token system merely limits the time window when the pecking order changes. A free-for-all development for a number of years until all manufacturers reach a similar performance baseline would've been much better for the show and I can't really see how it would've been more expensive than what we have now. I'm pretty sure that, if you go to Maranello or Sakura, you'll see all their resources utilized to the max, as both Ferrari and Honda want to compete, whereas, on the other hand, Renault haven't even used their allowed tokens.

Getting back on subject, loosing a top-runner like RB will always be a loss. Less top teams, less top drivers, fewer close-call battles for top positions can only be bad for F1. To that extent, everyone is acting in their own interest while, funnily enough, Ecclestone's are probably the closest to the F1 fan's. Money is what fuels F1 to be great. That money comes from having a lot of fans, so we have to accept that you can't attract a lot of fans just with engine pictures and aero details. No, they want to see drama, uncertainty over who's going to win, driver's pushing their cars to the limit in close call battles ON TRACK, so F1 is going to have to compromise on this if it wants to stay relevant as a sport. That compromise needs to result in having more top teams in direct competition with each other. But hell, if that compromise means that we'll get a chance to watch the best drivers in the world drive their cars and battle it out on track, I'm all up for it!

I have to disagree on several points,

Firstly RBR's key advantage was locked in. Rbr's key advantage was that The Renault power unit was more fuel efficient than the rest, and it was more tunable. The tunability & fuel efficiency of the Renault, is what made the RBR blown exhaust, and coanda exhaust so effective. It's not a coincidence, that the late 2013 serge of Lotus happened right after they got a mappings upgrade from Renault.


F1 history is full of teams dominating for multiple seasons consecutively.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F ... _Champions

Not to mention, F1 has never ever been about close racing, it's always been about someone puling away, any time it has been close, it's been by chance/luck.

[sgth0mas]

Answer the question...how is he being biased.

If you can't read between the lines and tell that's an anti Merc dominance bias, i feel sorry for you.

So you have absolutely no evidence of bias and this is your best shot at saving face? Cry me a river...i change my mind...the worst thing about F1 isnt the V6t, it is the whiney fans that cry about everything that they believe wrongs their driver or team and have nothing to prove their accusations.

[Just_a_fan]

The german GP cancellation is enough to show that merc fans really arent that into it anymore.

German fans weren't watching for a German team but for a German driver. Once there was no German driver (Nico isn't really German) they lost interest. If Vettel starts winning again on a regular basis the German fans may well return. Although if the ticket prices for the German GP are as high as the British GP I'm not surprised they stopped going.

(And of course Mercedes is a German team in name only. It's British in reality - British location, mostly British staff, British engines (sure, Mercedes bought the company but it's still basically Ilmor...).)

[dans79]

So you have absolutely no evidence of bias and this is your best shot at saving face? Cry me a river...i change my mind...the worst thing about F1 isnt the V6t, it is the whiney fans that cry about everything that they believe wrongs their driver or team and have nothing to prove their accusations.

Nice attempt at a slight, but if you intend to get a rise out of someone you are going to have to try a lot harder than that.

[alexx_88]

Firstly RBR's key advantage was locked in. Rbr's key advantage was that The Renault power unit was more fuel efficient than the rest, and it was more tunable. The tunability & fuel efficiency of the Renault, is what made the RBR blown exhaust, and coanda exhaust so effective. It's not a coincidence, that the late 2013 serge of Lotus happened right after they got a mappings upgrade from Renault.

F1 history is full of teams dominating for multiple seasons consecutively.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F ... _Champions

Not to mention, F1 has never ever been about close racing, it's always been about someone puling away, any time it has been close, it's been by chance/luck.

I can't agree with you on RB's advantage being locked in. It's enough to look at Mercedes in 2013 to see that was not the case. Had the tyres been a bit more durable, the Merc domination would've started in 2013.

Any engine is as tunable as the ECU allows it to be, so that's technically incorrect. The only engine-related part of their domination was the cold blowing that they were doing off-throttle and that was banned. Guess what? After a slight dip in form, they were back on top.

I agree that this wasn't the case before, but F1 needs to adapt to the times it lives in. Teams are no longer 20 guys who are also mechanics, engineers and promoters. They have hundreds of people they employ and are burning through a LOT of money. It's very simple, if F1 doesn't deliver the kind of entertainment that people want, viewership will continue to decline. And that entertainment simply isn't the leaders running 10s apart from the rest because they've done a marvelous job building the PU. Vast majority of the people watching don't care. We can either accept that or we can remain locked in the past waiting for the inevitable to happen.

[FoxHound]

I can't agree with you on RB's advantage being locked in. It's enough to look at Mercedes in 2013 to see that was not the case. Had the tyres been a bit more durable, the Merc domination would've started in 2013.

Alex, you forget the pain of 2010, 2011 and 2012.

Mercedes strong point was building engines, not aero or chassis. They had to spend 100's of millions to get that W04 anywhere near the Red Bull.

[Sevach]

I have to disagree on several points,

Firstly RBR's key advantage was locked in. Rbr's key advantage was that The Renault power unit was more fuel efficient than the rest, and it was more tunable. The tunability & fuel efficiency of the Renault, is what made the RBR blown exhaust, and coanda exhaust so effective. It's not a coincidence, that the late 2013 serge of Lotus happened right after they got a mappings upgrade from Renault.


F1 history is full of teams dominating for multiple seasons consecutively.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F ... _Champions

Not to mention, F1 has never ever been about close racing, it's always been about someone puling away, any time it has been close, it's been by chance/luck.

Even if you are right and the RBR advantage was locked in (something i don't agree with), how does make the fact that again a team is locked in an advantageous position any better? One that might be worth more than a second.

The V8 engine freeze was stupid, so is the V6 token system.

System which btw leads into a total freeze again, which is just the kiss of death to F1 honestly.

Aero spending is controlled through wind tunnel limitations, wouldn't it be easier to limit dyno usage regarding engines?

[dans79]

Any engine is as tunable as the ECU allows it to be, so that's technically incorrect. The only engine-related part of their domination was the cold blowing that they were doing off-throttle and that was banned. Guess what? After a slight dip in form, they were back on top.

Not true, various dimensional properties of the engine, like the shape of the piston head, port size & shape, etc etc have significant effects on how the motor can be tuned. Just because the ecu allows it, doesn't mean doing it won't burn up the motor. The tokens Merc used in Italy, where about this in fact. They changed aspects of the combustion chamber, to improve fuel efficiency.

Even if you are right and the RBR advantage was locked in (something i don't agree with), how does make the fact that again a team is locked in an advantageous position any better? One that might be worth more than a second.

The V8 engine freeze was stupid, so is the V6 token system.

I'm not saying it's any better, I'm countering the point that it's something new, and thus unfair.

[Just_a_fan]

. It's very simple, if F1 doesn't deliver the kind of entertainment that people want, viewership will continue to decline. And that entertainment simply isn't the leaders running 10s apart from the rest because they've done a marvelous job building the PU. Vast majority of the people watching don't care. We can either accept that or we can remain locked in the past waiting for the inevitable to happen.

The issue with entertainment isn't about who is winning and by how much. Entertainment for the uneducated masses is about watching cars dicing on track. There is actually a lot of that going on in F1 but it's seldom seen on the TV. This isn't the fault of the teams, it's the fault of FOM who control the coverage. Today we should be able to watch any one of the hundred or so cameras at the race. Bernie, on the other hand wants to show the race in an old fashioned format. Sure, you can pay through the nose for the additional content on formula1.com but even that won't change the TV coverage.

The reduction in Mercedes's on screen time recently is evidence of this control and lack of understanding by Bernie. (Dear mods, may I have a gold star for getting back on topic? =D> )

[Nathanael F1]

I don't think the entire problem is because of Mercedes' domination. Surely, there are parts of the race which should have been shown but were not. Rosberg vs. Hamilton at turn 2 wasn't shown on TV, and even now we only have onboards. If I remember correctly, Hamilton's pit stop was not shown.

[SectorOne]

The V8 engine freeze was stupid, so is the V6 token system.

I think we know by now that having a token system or not makes literally zero difference on how Honda and Renault would have performed with their V6´s.

Their problems haven´t been on what to spend tokens on, it´s been how to build a powerunit that actually works properly.
Then you look at Ferrari, unlike Renault actually understood what the issues were, fixed that and now runs a very competent engine all under this supposedly super-restricted token system.

[alexx_88]

It's not the token system per se, but how the deployment of that tokens is limited during the season. This year was an exception.

Also, Honda have said that they cannot fix their issues with ERS this year because of the lack of tokens. That development is happening anyway, how is forcing them to make it public next year cheaper than allowing it now?

I'd have said unlimited PU development until everyone reaches similar performance and start freezing it afterwards.

[SectorOne]

Also, Honda have said that they cannot fix their issues with ERS this year because of the lack of tokens. That development is happening anyway, how is forcing them to make it public next year cheaper than allowing it now?

Get back to me next season, see how the Honda performs then.