planetf1.com

Yesterday was a great race at Road America. Rossi dominated, but there was plenty of action behind him. I've attached a link to the 6 minute highlight video from the official Indycar website if any of you are interested. It was a pleasure to watch this race after the lacklustre French GP to say the least.

https://www.indycar.com/Videos/2019/06/ ... highlights

I watched this race and it was very fun. I think that those cars are fun to watch on race day. There really seems to be no struggle at all to follow and they are pretty quick.

The decision to prioritize breaking lap records instead of making the cars more race-able with the 2017 regulations changes was a foolish one for F1. Those types of decisions are my biggest gripe with the sport. People know how to make the racing better but they somehow choose to go in the opposite direction. It's mind-boggling.

A real penalty for leaving the track in that it take a while to clean up your tyres!
Loved the sideways drifting!

While I like the look and technology of the Formula 1 cars better, the Indycars certainly produce better racing.

Yesterday both the French GP and the Road America race were dominated by one driver from lap 1. Both races did have good racing and overtaking back in the pack. Still the Road America race was a much better show.

This was the first IndyCar race I've seen and I was pleasantly surprised in terms of the quality of the racing going on on the track. There were a number of aspects that put F1 to shame, but what was most apparent to me was how difficult the cars look to drive with the much reduced aero grip. They look constantly on the edge of adhesion, and you could see the drivers battling to keep it pointing in the same direction at times. It was spectacular stuff, much better than the F1 cars where you lose all sensation of the speed because they appear to be on rails.

What let it down tremendously though was the quality of the coverage, specifically that the number of adverts makes it unwatchable. Then not only do you miss a fair portion of the race because they're showing adverts instead, when they do cut back the race you then get endless replays showing you what you missed, thus you miss even more of the track action while this is going on. Then in the relatively small amount of time allotted to actually showing the race, they cut away again to promote some other show that the channel wants to advertise or at one point they started talking about a kart race that the presenting team took part in. Fortunately on the UK coverage they didn't cut to the adverts but showed the race coverage without commentary or on-screen graphics during the ad breaks (difficult for me watching for the first time and not recognising any of the cars), but I genuinely don't understand how people watching in the US put up with it. I'll never criticise the Sky coverage again if this is a potential alternative.

Indy Cars look like they're on the edge and the drivers seem to have to put far more steering input to keep them on track. F1 cars seem more and more like they are following tracks and the on-board shots show so little input from drivers.

j man wrote:I'll never criticise the Sky coverage again if this is a potential alternative.

This is why us American viewers think you guys have it pretty good, even if your coverage is a tad expensive! I'd much rather pay $100 per month than have ads every five minutes, but we don't even have that choice for IndyCar. For F1, we get your coverage, so it's nice to have no ads for a change.

I think Indycars are a good advert for why making the cars simpler would be a good thing.

I don't want F1 to be a spec series, but it doesn't need to be, just far, far less aero dependant.

Aero does absolutely nothing for the quality of the show, it does little to technologically advance the motor industry either.

Badgeronimous wrote:I think Indycars are a good advert for why making the cars simpler would be a good thing.

I don't want F1 to be a spec series, but it doesn't need to be, just far, far less aero dependant.

Aero does absolutely nothing for the quality of the show, it does little to technologically advance the motor industry either.

I could not agree more

Rossi's Indy Car contract is up. I'd like to see him on a competitive F1 team.

ptr250 wrote:Rossi's Indy Car contract is up. I'd like to see him on a competitive F1 team.

There's just not enough teams nowadays and there are 2-3 guys on the grid at all times who are locked in because of financial support and not talent. Rossi absolutely deserves a shot IMO and i believe he has what it takes to cut it in F1. He's right to insist on a good drive though. There is no point joining F1 via a bad team unless you are with a young driver program.

Honestly I'm disappointed in Haas. What on Earth is the point of having an American team if they pay absolutely no attention to American talent? We even have an established American circuit now and plans for another next year. It's just ridiculous that guys like Rossi are just ignored while the Lance Strolls and Robert Kubicas of the world are on the track.

You guy's must have had different coverage - I only had one ad I think that didn't have the live box in the corner.
How many stewards penalties would have been handed out?
I'm sorry I hate the sky F1 coverage - maybe that's just me. Well commentary.
Rossi had his shot and saw that if you can't land in the top maybe 2 seats you might as well go to track days.
Indy cars are making a come back but don't know if they will get back to the cart days.
IMSA abd WEC peak my interest these days - I still follow F1 but not anything like I used to.

Excellent drive by Rossi (can an F1 team call this guy up to lead their team already??!?!) and Team Andretti, but the rest of the action is typical and common among spec series.
Nothing to write home about here really, outside of how poorly Road America is maintained. The track looks like turd, unpainted apexes all over the place and it takes all of $1,000 in paint maybe.

They need to return to at least 4 different chassis and varying engine combos like they used to feature. Being as I was a huge fan of CART with its variety of chassis and engine combinations offering just as much, if not more , closer racing than you see today, with ANY driver and team having a chance to win each and every weekend. This single chassis formula really bugs me, especially since the chassis is a Dallara.

sandman1347 wrote:

ptr250 wrote:Rossi's Indy Car contract is up. I'd like to see him on a competitive F1 team.

There's just not enough teams nowadays and there are 2-3 guys on the grid at all times who are locked in because of financial support and not talent. Rossi absolutely deserves a shot IMO and i believe he has what it takes to cut it in F1. He's right to insist on a good drive though. There is no point joining F1 via a bad team unless you are with a young driver program.

Honestly I'm disappointed in Haas. What on Earth is the point of having an American team if they pay absolutely no attention to American talent? We even have an established American circuit now and plans for another next year. It's just ridiculous that guys like Rossi are just ignored while the Lance Strolls and Robert Kubicas of the world are on the track.

In regards to Haas, I can totally understand Gunther's initial belief in wanting to hire what he felt were the best driver options initially, given the salaries they were prepared to pay. Today however, I think they should be ready to look into hiring at least one American Driver to drive for them so long as he is up for the task, and I don't think anyone is more ready than Rossi. And as a supporter of Grosjean over the years, my faith in him has wained over the last couple of seasons and being as I follow him on Social media, his interests are perhaps too varied and vast to the point I don't see how he can be 100% committed to F1 the way he was before landing at Haas. And while Magnussen is at times less consistent than Grosjean, I really like his grit and don't give a crap attitude, I'm just getting on with MY race, but at times can be too aggressive in forcing people off the track. If he can tidy his style up a tad, I think at this point I might prefer Magnussen over Grosjean.

Either way, there is currently an American driver that is cream of the crop and seemingly improving all the time and someone needs to snap him up and get rid of the pay drivers because talented guys will always bring in money in the way of sponsorships. Companies that are on the fence in regards to investing money on F1 advertising can be swayed if a driver demands enough attention for the right reasons. Rossi is talented, well mannered, always positive and darn right quick! He should be in F1.

Now, if only The VW Group quit sandbagging and entered the series, that would open up 2 more seats, and for that matter, Ford should get back into F1.
A grid of 24-26 cars would be the phenomenal for F1.

Badgeronimous wrote:I think Indycars are a good advert for why making the cars simpler would be a good thing.

I don't want F1 to be a spec series, but it doesn't need to be, just far, far less aero dependant.

Aero does absolutely nothing for the quality of the show, it does little to technologically advance the motor industry either.

I disagree. Aero is perfectly fine and actually improves the show. What hurts the show is the extreme limitations placed on the aero. Teams have a problem they more than likely have a remedy for but cannot apply them because said remedies wouldn't adhere to the technical regs.

F1 was so great for so long because teams had a certain amount of freedom to devise unique trick systems that would afford them a slight advantage, but then the next team did the same and in the end battles were quite close. If you look at the disparity is overall design and design principles/concepts in the 70's, 80's and even through the early to mid 90's car designs differed significantly, yet the racing was usually close and full of excitement. Had F1 always been so strict with the regs, we'd likely have never seen the MP4/1 which changed racing the world over! THINK about that one. Brabham's fan car opened the door in engineers' brains and look at how ground effects have evolved over the decades. Diffusers likely share a far closer relationship to that car's system than most people realize and the freedom in the rules back then is what lead to so many innovations that are static fixtures in basic race car design. Today we see small hints of that here and there, but overall, teams are maxed out with what they can do to the point the top 10 cars are closer together than at any other time in the history of the sport. Only those teams who get something fundamentally wrong are considerably off the mark, but even mid pack runners are only a .5 t 1 second or so off the top cars.

Obviously you've never been there. Whats paint got to do with the quality of a course??
The disco designer track crowd??
Old real courses show their age.
Road america is a PREMIER road course in line with Spa, the old ring and the full Glen.
It's supposed to be a race not a show. That's where they started down the wrong path.
Painted parking lots - don't they call that rally cross??

I don't see any point in Rossi going to F1.................unless you're in the 2 front running teams you're just plodding around mid pack or worse - no matter how good a driver you are. Stay in Indycar and win some championships.

Exediron wrote:

j man wrote:I'll never criticise the Sky coverage again if this is a potential alternative.

This is why us American viewers think you guys have it pretty good, even if your coverage is a tad expensive! I'd much rather pay $100 per month than have ads every five minutes, but we don't even have that choice for IndyCar. For F1, we get your coverage, so it's nice to have no ads for a change.

I've started watching this now as it's part of the Sky F1 channel.

One question - the adverts you get every 5 minutes during Indycar - is that "full on" averts?

When they say on the Sky F1 channel about "adverts" during Indycar races, it just goes quiet but we still get the race footage.

PT03 wrote:I don't see any point in Rossi going to F1.................unless you're in the 2 front running teams you're just plodding around mid pack or worse - no matter how good a driver you are. Stay in Indycar and win some championships.

the obvious is $$, much more than he will be offered in indy car this off season.

the tv advertising in the states is the same for all american sports. frustrating at times, but mostly we are used to it

Rossi is very hungry for an Indycar championship. And I think he will get it this year. I don't know if a backmarker F1 team would lure him away.
Regarding the condition of the track, sure there is worn paint but the place overall is spectacular.

jimmyj wrote:Rossi is very hungry for an Indycar championship. And I think he will get it this year. I don't know if a backmarker F1 team would lure him away.

I'm sure it wouldn't. A genuine midfield contender might be a more tempting proposition, however. McLaren or Renault aren't challenging for the title now, but they have the theoretical potential to do so, and can certainly pay a salary to match or exceed any offer from an Indy team.

Renault is the best option for Rossi.

Unless Gasly does not perform this year.

I would be shocked if Rossi gets a call up for a mid-season test. Pending anything that does not interfere on any events.

Placid wrote:Renault is the best option for Rossi.

Unless Gasly does not perform this year.

I would be shocked if Rossi gets a call up for a mid-season test. Pending anything that does not interfere on any events.

That Red Bull seat is the ultimate poison pill. Being dropped into an underperforming top car against arguably the best driver on the grid? Talk about a career killer. Rossi would do well to avoid even a whiff of that one.

ptr250 wrote:Rossi's Indy Car contract is up. I'd like to see him on a competitive F1 team.

Apparently all the top Indycar teams are after him, Andretti need more money to keep him which may come from their main sponsor or from Honda to stop him going to Penske.

Red Bull seem to be struggling a bit with their talent pool at the moment, Gasly is on the brink of getting dropped, Kvyat failed last time he got promoted although he seems to be better grounded this year, whilst it's too early for Albon to get promoted.

Red Bull are putting all this effort into youngster Patricio O'Ward who is done nothing yet in Indycar whilst Rossi is looking to be the biggest star.

Honda probably have little say in the Red Bull driver line up and may well prefer that Rossi stays in America winning titles in a Honda powered car but the connection is there and is something that I would think would interest Rossi.

Yellowbin74 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

j man wrote:I'll never criticise the Sky coverage again if this is a potential alternative.

This is why us American viewers think you guys have it pretty good, even if your coverage is a tad expensive! I'd much rather pay $100 per month than have ads every five minutes, but we don't even have that choice for IndyCar. For F1, we get your coverage, so it's nice to have no ads for a change.

I've started watching this now as it's part of the Sky F1 channel.

One question - the adverts you get every 5 minutes during Indycar - is that "full on" averts?

When they say on the Sky F1 channel about "adverts" during Indycar races, it just goes quiet but we still get the race footage.

When it goes quiet the American are on a 3 minute ad break and there was 9 ad breaks, throw in some fluff that has nothing to do with the race and the Americans only get to see two thirds of the race.

Exediron wrote:

Placid wrote:Renault is the best option for Rossi.

Unless Gasly does not perform this year.

I would be shocked if Rossi gets a call up for a mid-season test. Pending anything that does not interfere on any events.

That Red Bull seat is the ultimate poison pill. Being dropped into an underperforming top car against arguably the best driver on the grid? Talk about a career killer. Rossi would do well to avoid even a whiff of that one.

That sort of comes with the territory though, you want to be F1 WDC but you also want to avoid the best, it would be no different at Mercedes, a little less so at Ferrari.

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

Placid wrote:Renault is the best option for Rossi.

Unless Gasly does not perform this year.

I would be shocked if Rossi gets a call up for a mid-season test. Pending anything that does not interfere on any events.

That Red Bull seat is the ultimate poison pill. Being dropped into an underperforming top car against arguably the best driver on the grid? Talk about a career killer. Rossi would do well to avoid even a whiff of that one.

That sort of comes with the territory though, you want to be F1 WDC but you also want to avoid the best, it would be no different at Mercedes, a little less so at Ferrari.

At least in Mercedes or Ferrari you wouldn't be in an under-performing car. There's literally nothing to be gained by going to Red Bull at the moment. Everyone looks worse in a poor car, no matter who your teammate is.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

Placid wrote:Renault is the best option for Rossi.

Unless Gasly does not perform this year.

I would be shocked if Rossi gets a call up for a mid-season test. Pending anything that does not interfere on any events.

That Red Bull seat is the ultimate poison pill. Being dropped into an underperforming top car against arguably the best driver on the grid? Talk about a career killer. Rossi would do well to avoid even a whiff of that one.

That sort of comes with the territory though, you want to be F1 WDC but you also want to avoid the best, it would be no different at Mercedes, a little less so at Ferrari.

At least in Mercedes or Ferrari you wouldn't be in an under-performing car. There's literally nothing to be gained by going to Red Bull at the moment. Everyone looks worse in a poor car, no matter who your teammate is.

Well if a car like the Red Bull is not good enough for Rossi then I guess we won't see Rossi in F1?

750k2 wrote:Obviously you've never been there. Whats paint got to do with the quality of a course??
The disco designer track crowd??
Old real courses show their age.
Road america is a PREMIER road course in line with Spa, the old ring and the full Glen.
It's supposed to be a race not a show. That's where they started down the wrong path.
Painted parking lots - don't they call that rally cross??

One doesn’t have to physically go there to SEE how it’s kept up and maintained. The track itself is excellent for racing but it’s seen better days. A world class facility being featured on TV should look the part, not like they hired a bunch of kids to rip out weeds but the track’s edge to make it not look so unkept. It’s not that hard.
And while it’s an excellent course, it’s nowhere near as good as Spa. The surface, the greenery… it all looks like a track that’s closed all year and only opened for a race here and there. Is that such a terrible observation? It’s no different than the absurdly poor trophies tracks we’re giving F1 drivers a few years ago.

You are putting a lot of value on the cosmetics of a course, mercenary. While I too like a well maintained course from a visual standpoint, but in the end the layout and track surface are What really counts, not the painted graphics.

Mod Edit: Message deleted

I watched it again and just can't see it as looking shabby, except for the old looking concrete barriers. In any case, it doesn't really matter and it was a great show. If any of you have the chance to go there you will love the place.

are their some areas of road america that could use sprucing up, yes. does that change the nature of an excellent track to race at, and watch a race. no

the track was losing money for a long time and could have just went away, as far as hosting an indy car race, or any other race.

i look at it this way, they started promoting and investing the money in new buildings, infrastructure, and track safety that needed fixed to get bigger races there. as they keep making money, they will keep improving the place. i'm not concerned that some areas aren't painted.

Blake wrote:You are putting a lot of value on the cosmetics of a course, mercenary. While I too like a well maintained course from a visual standpoint, but in the end the layout and track surface are What really counts, not the painted graphics.

They don't charge any less to host a major race so therefore they should live up to a basic standard.
Most tracks and sporting stadiums don't have green grass like you see during games/events, and they actually spray the grass with a special lye.
I saw them doing it at Dolphin stadium while I was installing the backdrop in the CBS Pre-Game show booth.
And while the grass looked pretty good, after they sprayed it, it looked flawlessly vibrant.

I honestly don't think it's asking too much.