planetf1.com

Just a reminder that FP1 for FE starts in 30 mins and I believe it's being shown on youtube.

pokerman wrote:Just a reminder that FP1 for FE starts in 30 mins and I believe it's being shown on youtube.

It was also live on the BBC Red Button. I fell asleep during the race..

tim3003 wrote:

pokerman wrote:Just a reminder that FP1 for FE starts in 30 mins and I believe it's being shown on youtube.

It was also live on the BBC Red Button. I fell asleep during the race..

I watched qualifying on the red button but for the race all I got was snooker so watched the race on the BBC Sport website.

It was on Eurosport, too.

Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

What do you mean by that? Are you talking about the range they now have?

Asphalt_World wrote:It was on Eurosport, too.

Was it? The schedule said Eurosport 2 but I missed the start of coverage because they stuck with skiing.

P-F1 Mod wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:It was on Eurosport, too.

Was it? The schedule said Eurosport 2 but I missed the start of coverage because they stuck with skiing.

I watched it.

Asphalt_World wrote:It was on Eurosport, too.

Yeah I know but I didn't have access to Sky at that time.

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I love FE but the really need to find a way to not give so many penalties for "technical infringements". There is always loads and nobody watches a motor race to see who can stick to the rules.

I wasn't aware that there's ever been an issue with FE cars running on traditional circuits as long as the track is short enough to allow plenty of laps. I always figured the reason it went to odd places, such as the circuit in Rome, was to try to be different.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I love FE but the really need to find a way to not give so many penalties for "technical infringements". There is always loads and nobody watches a motor race to see who can stick to the rules.

It was part race track, part street track, parts of the track were very tight.

I'm not sure about the fear about the racing being boring on a proper race track it's just the actual limitations of the car in being able to race on a proper track because of the lack of range, they chose for instance not to race on the GP track.

Regarding the rules surely they are there to prevent drivers from gaining an unfair advantage, it's not something I would criticise the series for.

Asphalt_World wrote:I wasn't aware that there's ever been an issue with FE cars running on traditional circuits as long as the track is short enough to allow plenty of laps. I always figured the reason it went to odd places, such as the circuit in Rome, was to try to be different.

Well it's true about running plenty of laps, the circuits are designed to suit the cars and tight street circuits are ideal for them and the lack of noise is ideal for city centres.

To maximise range you need tracks were the straights are not too long and no steep gradients.

pokerman wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:I wasn't aware that there's ever been an issue with FE cars running on traditional circuits as long as the track is short enough to allow plenty of laps. I always figured the reason it went to odd places, such as the circuit in Rome, was to try to be different.

Well it's true about running plenty of laps, the circuits are designed to suit the cars and tight street circuits are ideal for them and the lack of noise is ideal for city centres.

To maximise range you need tracks were the straights are not too long and no steep gradients.

Thing is, the race in Rome was no where near the centre of the city. There was nothing recognisable about that part of the city. Seemed they missed a trick there and other places too. Wasn't the Berlin race at an airport?

Bit of a shame really.

Asphalt_World wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:I wasn't aware that there's ever been an issue with FE cars running on traditional circuits as long as the track is short enough to allow plenty of laps. I always figured the reason it went to odd places, such as the circuit in Rome, was to try to be different.

Well it's true about running plenty of laps, the circuits are designed to suit the cars and tight street circuits are ideal for them and the lack of noise is ideal for city centres.

To maximise range you need tracks were the straights are not too long and no steep gradients.

Thing is, the race in Rome was no where near the centre of the city. There was nothing recognisable about that part of the city. Seemed they missed a trick there and other places too. Wasn't the Berlin race at an airport?

Bit of a shame really.

Well I think it might be a case of not being able to get permission, I would be guessing that second best is then being as close to a city as possible?

pokerman wrote:

tim3003 wrote:

pokerman wrote:Just a reminder that FP1 for FE starts in 30 mins and I believe it's being shown on youtube.

It was also live on the BBC Red Button. I fell asleep during the race..

I watched qualifying on the red button but for the race all I got was snooker so watched the race on the BBC Sport website.

On Freeview, which I have, you can go direct to channel 601 - which is the Red button channel, rather than by pressing the red button from BBC1 etc. Maybe the 2 aren't always the same?

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

tim3003 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

tim3003 wrote:

pokerman wrote:Just a reminder that FP1 for FE starts in 30 mins and I believe it's being shown on youtube.

It was also live on the BBC Red Button. I fell asleep during the race..

I watched qualifying on the red button but for the race all I got was snooker so watched the race on the BBC Sport website.

On Freeview, which I have, you can go direct to channel 601 - which is the Red button channel, rather than by pressing the red button from BBC1 etc. Maybe the 2 aren't always the same?

I went direct to 601 were it was scheduled to be shown at 22.00 after the snooker but as the snooker had not finished they carried on with the snooker and kept pushing FE back at which point it wouldn't be live anymore.

Over the years I think I've got spoilt with Sky and forgotten the haphazard sports planning of the BBC past.

tim3003 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

tim3003 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

I think generally in FE the overtaking is just about right. It's hard enough that the defending driver stands a chance and watching an overtake is fun an impressive but not so hard as to make it impossible.

I enjoy it for what it is. I don't compare it to F1 because they are different sports that aim to do different things. They race on tracks that are suitable for the cars. I don't really see what's contrived about that? I think they do want to make it feel like an endurance test. You have to chose which time in the race you want to push and when to hold back.

It's not for everyone I'm sure but personally I enjoy it.

pokerman wrote:

tim3003 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Was a great race and showed FE cars can race on proper race tracks.

Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I mean, basically the only thing they do to make things unpredictable is the qualifying format.

Bottom line a new racing series will always need to make things exciting. F1 has the advantage of context. It can afford "dull" races. I put dull in quotation marks because I very, very rarely get bored watching an F1 race. Even if there is no action. That's because I know how big it is, how much it means. FE doesn't have that. They have to have more happening on track. Luckily they do.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

tim3003 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Was it not half a proper race track?

They could always race on a proper race track the problem was always of range and still is, in Mexico I believe they still had to do a lot of coasting.

The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I mean, basically the only thing they do to make things unpredictable is the qualifying format.

Bottom line a new racing series will always need to make things exciting. F1 has the advantage of context. It can afford "dull" races. I put dull in quotation marks because I very, very rarely get bored watching an F1 race. Even if there is no action. That's because I know how big it is, how much it means. FE doesn't have that. They have to have more happening on track. Luckily they do.

No it's not just that, I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

tim3003 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
The point is it was a race track rather than a street circuit. The racing actually seemed to work better on a more open track without walls lining all of it. It had been said that the racing would be dull on a more open track.

I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I mean, basically the only thing they do to make things unpredictable is the qualifying format.

Bottom line a new racing series will always need to make things exciting. F1 has the advantage of context. It can afford "dull" races. I put dull in quotation marks because I very, very rarely get bored watching an F1 race. Even if there is no action. That's because I know how big it is, how much it means. FE doesn't have that. They have to have more happening on track. Luckily they do.

No it's not just that, I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

It's a semi spec series. For better or worse It's happening in F1 as well. Look how much more alike the cars look now to what they did just 10 years ago. The development window narrows in F1 with every regulation change.

The very concept of a championship is "manufactured" by it's very nature. If you accept having a championship you accept that.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

tim3003 wrote: I must admit I find FE very boring. Yes the racing is close, but surely that's because all the cars are the same and passing is hard on those tight circuits. It comes across as a bit of a lottery to me.

Also, the whole restriction on range and monitoring of charge level seems to me to be anti-racing. In Mexico they had a safety car for several laps, but instead of allowing drivers to go for it with the extra charge they now had available on the restart they docked 5 laps worth. It's almost like endurance racing. Or is the idea to give dramatic finishes where cars can run out on the last lap? In F1 in the early '80s fuel limits produced that, and everyone hated it.

It strikes me too that the tight slow city tracks are deliberately contrived to mask the cars' tiny ranges. They race for what? 60 miles at ~70mph for 45 minutes? That's not even a third of a GP distance. Presumably on the full Mexico circuit they wouldn't even make 50 miles. A huge advance in battery technology is needed before electric racing becomes a replacement for F1 etc. And given that govts are now talking about phasing out petrol engines in 10-15 years I find that worrying for the future.

I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I mean, basically the only thing they do to make things unpredictable is the qualifying format.

Bottom line a new racing series will always need to make things exciting. F1 has the advantage of context. It can afford "dull" races. I put dull in quotation marks because I very, very rarely get bored watching an F1 race. Even if there is no action. That's because I know how big it is, how much it means. FE doesn't have that. They have to have more happening on track. Luckily they do.

No it's not just that, I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

It's a semi spec series. For better or worse It's happening in F1 as well. Look how much more alike the cars look now to what they did just 10 years ago. The development window narrows in F1 with every regulation change.

The very concept of a championship is "manufactured" by it's very nature. If you accept having a championship you accept that.

I can accept cars being close to equal due to natural competition, however I can't except manufactured races.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I mean, basically the only thing they do to make things unpredictable is the qualifying format.

Bottom line a new racing series will always need to make things exciting. F1 has the advantage of context. It can afford "dull" races. I put dull in quotation marks because I very, very rarely get bored watching an F1 race. Even if there is no action. That's because I know how big it is, how much it means. FE doesn't have that. They have to have more happening on track. Luckily they do.

No it's not just that, I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

It's a semi spec series. For better or worse It's happening in F1 as well. Look how much more alike the cars look now to what they did just 10 years ago. The development window narrows in F1 with every regulation change.

The very concept of a championship is "manufactured" by it's very nature. If you accept having a championship you accept that.

I can accept cars being close to equal due to natural competition, however I can't except manufactured races.

And yet, you do. In loads of ways. I can't think of a racing series that doesn't have some sporting regulations intended to make racing more exciting.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: I mean, basically the only thing they do to make things unpredictable is the qualifying format.

Bottom line a new racing series will always need to make things exciting. F1 has the advantage of context. It can afford "dull" races. I put dull in quotation marks because I very, very rarely get bored watching an F1 race. Even if there is no action. That's because I know how big it is, how much it means. FE doesn't have that. They have to have more happening on track. Luckily they do.

No it's not just that, I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

It's a semi spec series. For better or worse It's happening in F1 as well. Look how much more alike the cars look now to what they did just 10 years ago. The development window narrows in F1 with every regulation change.

The very concept of a championship is "manufactured" by it's very nature. If you accept having a championship you accept that.

I can accept cars being close to equal due to natural competition, however I can't except manufactured races.

And yet, you do. In loads of ways. I can't think of a racing series that doesn't have some sporting regulations intended to make racing more exciting.

We've been down this road before were perhaps an uncalled for SC which only occasionally happens scales up to they might as well go full hog and totally corrupt the racing, this I find a strange argument.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: No it's not just that, I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

It's a semi spec series. For better or worse It's happening in F1 as well. Look how much more alike the cars look now to what they did just 10 years ago. The development window narrows in F1 with every regulation change.

The very concept of a championship is "manufactured" by it's very nature. If you accept having a championship you accept that.

I can accept cars being close to equal due to natural competition, however I can't except manufactured races.

And yet, you do. In loads of ways. I can't think of a racing series that doesn't have some sporting regulations intended to make racing more exciting.

We've been down this road before were perhaps an uncalled for SC which only occasionally happens scales up to they might as well go full hog and totally corrupt the racing, this I find a strange argument.

I wasn't thinking of the "safety" car in this case.

I mean, the "safety" car does totally corrupt any race in which it is used. That's undeniable.

That's a bit different to what I assume you mean by "manufactured races" though? I assume you mean elements added purely to make things more eventful or exciting or sporting regulations that force competitors to do things they wouldn't do otherwise?

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: It's a semi spec series. For better or worse It's happening in F1 as well. Look how much more alike the cars look now to what they did just 10 years ago. The development window narrows in F1 with every regulation change.

The very concept of a championship is "manufactured" by it's very nature. If you accept having a championship you accept that.

I can accept cars being close to equal due to natural competition, however I can't except manufactured races.

And yet, you do. In loads of ways. I can't think of a racing series that doesn't have some sporting regulations intended to make racing more exciting.

We've been down this road before were perhaps an uncalled for SC which only occasionally happens scales up to they might as well go full hog and totally corrupt the racing, this I find a strange argument.

I wasn't thinking of the "safety" car in this case.

I mean, the "safety" car does totally corrupt any race in which it is used. That's undeniable.

That's a bit different to what I assume you mean by "manufactured races" though? I assume you mean elements added purely to make things more eventful or exciting or sporting regulations that force competitors to do things they wouldn't do otherwise?

Yeah I would mean systems in place that are specifically designed to handicap the top drivers, an extreme example would be reverse grids, I would say that the FE system is along those lines.

If the F1 cars were as even in performance as the FE cars I believe they would never go down that route, the even competition would be enough entertainment in itself, the route FE has gone down is to be basically 100% about entertainment and not so much about the sport itself, they have to ensure multiple winners and championships that go down to wire by basically ensuring that no one driver can build up any kind of lead, after 4 races we have:-

1. Evans 47*
2. Sims 46*
3. da Costa 39
4. Vandoorne 38
5. di Grassi 32
6. Bird 28*
7. Rowland 28
8. Guenther 25*
9. Mortara 22
10. Lotterer 21

*Winners

That's the series hitting it's target.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: I can accept cars being close to equal due to natural competition, however I can't except manufactured races.

And yet, you do. In loads of ways. I can't think of a racing series that doesn't have some sporting regulations intended to make racing more exciting.

We've been down this road before were perhaps an uncalled for SC which only occasionally happens scales up to they might as well go full hog and totally corrupt the racing, this I find a strange argument.

I wasn't thinking of the "safety" car in this case.

I mean, the "safety" car does totally corrupt any race in which it is used. That's undeniable.

That's a bit different to what I assume you mean by "manufactured races" though? I assume you mean elements added purely to make things more eventful or exciting or sporting regulations that force competitors to do things they wouldn't do otherwise?

Yeah I would mean systems in place that are specifically designed to handicap the top drivers, an extreme example would be reverse grids, I would say that the FE system is along those lines.

If the F1 cars were as even in performance as the FE cars I believe they would never go down that route, the even competition would be enough entertainment in itself, the route FE has gone down is to be basically 100% about entertainment and not so much about the sport itself, they have to ensure multiple winners and championships that go down to wire by basically ensuring that no one driver can build up any kind of lead, after 4 races we have:-

1. Evans 47*
2. Sims 46*
3. da Costa 39
4. Vandoorne 38
5. di Grassi 32
6. Bird 28*
7. Rowland 28
8. Guenther 25*
9. Mortara 22
10. Lotterer 21

*Winners

That's the series hitting it's target.

Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

Don't think F1 doesn't add things in to make the racing more exciting as well though. That's what I took to mean by "manufactured" races.

mikeyg123 wrote:Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

As someone who has watched every ePrix since the first and would consider himself a fan of the series, I don't really agree. I think the excessively gimmicky nature of FE detracts from the standing it could otherwise have as top level motorsport, and that additionally it's totally unnecessary. Formula E cars are already capable of close racing just by their nature: they don't need any help.

The way group qualifying is done is also a pet peeve of mine - we frequently hear the commentators remarking on how impressive it is if anyone from group 1 makes it into Super Pole, and that's because they're screwed by the inevitable track evolution.

All too often, Formula E comes off as a series that's desperate to be exciting and doesn't seem confident enough in its own product to just rely on the good racing it already has.

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

As someone who has watched every ePrix since the first and would consider himself a fan of the series, I don't really agree. I think the excessively gimmicky nature of FE detracts from the standing it could otherwise have as top level motorsport, and that additionally it's totally unnecessary. Formula E cars are already capable of close racing just by their nature: they don't need any help.

The way group qualifying is done is also a pet peeve of mine - we frequently hear the commentators remarking on how impressive it is if anyone from group 1 makes it into Super Pole, and that's because they're screwed by the inevitable track evolution.

All too often, Formula E comes off as a series that's desperate to be exciting and doesn't seem confident enough in its own product to just rely on the good racing it already has.

I don't really disagree with you. I guess I just quite enjoy the gimicky nature of it. It's different. The trouble it has is that nobody really cares who the FE champion is. This means each race as to be exciting in itself.

pokerman wrote: I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

I think that in starting FE the FIA has not set out to create a full-blooded racing series. Instead it has two aims:

1 - to raise the profile of electric motoring, by demonstrating that electric cars can race and showcasing the evolving technology. So 'the show' is more important than the purity of the racing.

2 - giving the big manufacturers a chance to show their Green credentials by running teams. As has been pointed out, they are not allowed to spend big money on works teams and genuinely compete with all their financial and technical might. The German car makers have now all decided they have to be in, and Nissan and Jaguar - no US interest though. Once the novelty wears off I wonder if they'll stay..

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: And yet, you do. In loads of ways. I can't think of a racing series that doesn't have some sporting regulations intended to make racing more exciting.

We've been down this road before were perhaps an uncalled for SC which only occasionally happens scales up to they might as well go full hog and totally corrupt the racing, this I find a strange argument.

I wasn't thinking of the "safety" car in this case.

I mean, the "safety" car does totally corrupt any race in which it is used. That's undeniable.

That's a bit different to what I assume you mean by "manufactured races" though? I assume you mean elements added purely to make things more eventful or exciting or sporting regulations that force competitors to do things they wouldn't do otherwise?

Yeah I would mean systems in place that are specifically designed to handicap the top drivers, an extreme example would be reverse grids, I would say that the FE system is along those lines.

If the F1 cars were as even in performance as the FE cars I believe they would never go down that route, the even competition would be enough entertainment in itself, the route FE has gone down is to be basically 100% about entertainment and not so much about the sport itself, they have to ensure multiple winners and championships that go down to wire by basically ensuring that no one driver can build up any kind of lead, after 4 races we have:-

1. Evans 47*
2. Sims 46*
3. da Costa 39
4. Vandoorne 38
5. di Grassi 32
6. Bird 28*
7. Rowland 28
8. Guenther 25*
9. Mortara 22
10. Lotterer 21

*Winners

That's the series hitting it's target.

Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

Don't think F1 doesn't add things in to make the racing more exciting as well though. That's what I took to mean by "manufactured" races.

Only if you consider all SC's to be manufactured, rather that then restarted races, how many SC's corrupted the race result last year, 2 or 3?

This opposed to every FE race being corrupted.

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

As someone who has watched every ePrix since the first and would consider himself a fan of the series, I don't really agree. I think the excessively gimmicky nature of FE detracts from the standing it could otherwise have as top level motorsport, and that additionally it's totally unnecessary. Formula E cars are already capable of close racing just by their nature: they don't need any help.

The way group qualifying is done is also a pet peeve of mine - we frequently hear the commentators remarking on how impressive it is if anyone from group 1 makes it into Super Pole, and that's because they're screwed by the inevitable track evolution.

All too often, Formula E comes off as a series that's desperate to be exciting and doesn't seem confident enough in its own product to just rely on the good racing it already has.

Yeah that explains my feelings about it too a tee.

Like I said from what I've read they don't want to risk any driver dominating the series.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

As someone who has watched every ePrix since the first and would consider himself a fan of the series, I don't really agree. I think the excessively gimmicky nature of FE detracts from the standing it could otherwise have as top level motorsport, and that additionally it's totally unnecessary. Formula E cars are already capable of close racing just by their nature: they don't need any help.

The way group qualifying is done is also a pet peeve of mine - we frequently hear the commentators remarking on how impressive it is if anyone from group 1 makes it into Super Pole, and that's because they're screwed by the inevitable track evolution.

All too often, Formula E comes off as a series that's desperate to be exciting and doesn't seem confident enough in its own product to just rely on the good racing it already has.

I don't really disagree with you. I guess I just quite enjoy the gimicky nature of it. It's different. The trouble it has is that nobody really cares who the FE champion is. This means each race as to be exciting in itself.

In other words it's little more than light entertainment?

tim3003 wrote:

pokerman wrote: I read somewhere that the bottom line is to make the racing unpredictable which starts with the qualifying, as for the governments I'm not sure how aware they are of the practical limitations of electric cars, it's more important perhaps to appease political pressure with carbon neutral policies.

I read they deliberately have closed down development paths for the manufacturers in order that one doesn't steal a big advantage like we may see in F1, but yes like you say the bottom line is to create close racing just not in the races themselves but in the championship as well, it is to a point a bit manufactured but some people don't mind that.

I think that in starting FE the FIA has not set out to create a full-blooded racing series. Instead it has two aims:

1 - to raise the profile of electric motoring, by demonstrating that electric cars can race and showcasing the evolving technology. So 'the show' is more important than the purity of the racing.

2 - giving the big manufacturers a chance to show their Green credentials by running teams. As has been pointed out, they are not allowed to spend big money on works teams and genuinely compete with all their financial and technical might. The German car makers have now all decided they have to be in, and Nissan and Jaguar - no US interest though. Once the novelty wears off I wonder if they'll stay..

Just one thing I'm not sure the FIA themselves created the series, wasn't it a private company?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: We've been down this road before were perhaps an uncalled for SC which only occasionally happens scales up to they might as well go full hog and totally corrupt the racing, this I find a strange argument.

I wasn't thinking of the "safety" car in this case.

I mean, the "safety" car does totally corrupt any race in which it is used. That's undeniable.

That's a bit different to what I assume you mean by "manufactured races" though? I assume you mean elements added purely to make things more eventful or exciting or sporting regulations that force competitors to do things they wouldn't do otherwise?

Yeah I would mean systems in place that are specifically designed to handicap the top drivers, an extreme example would be reverse grids, I would say that the FE system is along those lines.

If the F1 cars were as even in performance as the FE cars I believe they would never go down that route, the even competition would be enough entertainment in itself, the route FE has gone down is to be basically 100% about entertainment and not so much about the sport itself, they have to ensure multiple winners and championships that go down to wire by basically ensuring that no one driver can build up any kind of lead, after 4 races we have:-

1. Evans 47*
2. Sims 46*
3. da Costa 39
4. Vandoorne 38
5. di Grassi 32
6. Bird 28*
7. Rowland 28
8. Guenther 25*
9. Mortara 22
10. Lotterer 21

*Winners

That's the series hitting it's target.

Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

Don't think F1 doesn't add things in to make the racing more exciting as well though. That's what I took to mean by "manufactured" races.

Only if you consider all SC's to be manufactured, rather that then restarted races, how many SC's corrupted the race result last year, 2 or 3?

This opposed to every FE race being corrupted.

What? I literally said wasn't talking about safety cars in this case.

I wouldn't say FE races are corrupted. It's just a formula where cars aren't necessarily lined up in speed order.

When you said you didn't like manufactured races I was actually thinking of the tyre rules we have in F1. You are forced to pit and use two different compounds.

You can't deny that is a manufactured aspect of the sport. If given the choice at Monaco for example they wouldn't pit at all. Other occasions they would rather run medium tyres in both stints etc.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Yes and that's good for what it is. It's not trying to be F1.

As someone who has watched every ePrix since the first and would consider himself a fan of the series, I don't really agree. I think the excessively gimmicky nature of FE detracts from the standing it could otherwise have as top level motorsport, and that additionally it's totally unnecessary. Formula E cars are already capable of close racing just by their nature: they don't need any help.

The way group qualifying is done is also a pet peeve of mine - we frequently hear the commentators remarking on how impressive it is if anyone from group 1 makes it into Super Pole, and that's because they're screwed by the inevitable track evolution.

All too often, Formula E comes off as a series that's desperate to be exciting and doesn't seem confident enough in its own product to just rely on the good racing it already has.

I don't really disagree with you. I guess I just quite enjoy the gimicky nature of it. It's different. The trouble it has is that nobody really cares who the FE champion is. This means each race as to be exciting in itself.

In other words it's little more than light entertainment?

It's an entertaining motor racing series. Beyond that any individual fan can take it as seriously as they like.

pokerman wrote: Just one thing I'm not sure the FIA themselves created the series, wasn't it a private company?

I'm sure it was done under licence of, and at the instigation of the FIA. The point is, the FIA (in its own words):

"not only promotes motor sport, but also safe, sustainable and accessible mobility for all road users across the world".

FE is an example of promoting sustainability as much as a genuine racing series.