Formula 1
-
Speed plus proximity to the other cars I reckon. Knowing where your edges are at that speed with everyone having that level manoeuvrability as well as straight-line speed makes the decision making just incredible
Edit - said with absolute zero driving ability of his own
-
There is a large element of bravery. Schumacher was so good because he broke so much later than everyone else. And if you get things wrong there is a significant element of danger to person. It is physically demanding as well, the G forces must be crazy
-
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
Honestly, I think racing is probably like Golf, in that the top top drivers are all much of a much ness, with the mentality being the difference between the elite and the next tier.
I'd agree with that. F1 has "some" of the top drivers around, but some who aren't as well and the disparity shows at times, which is a shame for the sport as a genuine contest across the field would improve it, but as you say we have already discussed it. Seeing two top drivers in the same team is great (with McLaren at the moment for example).
Would love to see some guys from other fields occasionally. Kyle Larson is incredibly talented but we'll never see him in F1. Dixon is behind only Foyt in Indycar titles now, but turned down F1 because he basically didn't trust the politics to get a drive, and wasn't prepared to play the waiting game that Lawson is having to play. Would be interesting to see Palou go as he was being chased I believe. He would be a good "cross code" comparator. With McLaren in Indy now (and getting more competitive) there might be a cross over driver with O'Ward, for example. McLaughlin was almost instantly successful going from a supercar to Indy, hugely different, but he managed it, even on ovals, very quickly. SVG went from supercars to Nascar and won straight away as well. Incredibly talented.
The crux of all that is that we don't get to see these guys get a crack in F1 because they don't get the opportunity, they are more than likely good enough though. Hopefully Andretti get a place at the table so at least another couple of seats.
Impossible to know just how good any of them are even in the same formula really, given that some teams produce superior cars within the formula itself, but I'd love to see some guys fill seats in F1 that were there on raw talent and not funding / nepotism/ politics, etc. Anyway, my dreams don't count for much anywhere, let alone F1.
I disagree. Every single f1 team will have stats on every driver in every competition on the planet. Everybody knows the single biggest differentiator is the driver. Data scientists in these guys alone will be deep into double figures for every team.
A good example is Craig Lowndes.
Dominated super cars, went to Europe, got a seat beside Montoya in the same car. Then failed whilst Montoya went on.
I get your overall point, which I agree, but I would suggest that very few, if any, drivers don’t get an f1 shot if they really are up to it.
-
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.
But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.
I still disagree, F1 and similar races are very formulaic. It's about repetitive exactness, not necessarily driving skill. However you define that, being great at F1 does not mean you're better, just different,
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.
But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.
I still disagree, F1 and similar races are very formulaic. It's about repetitive exactness, not necessarily driving skill. However you define that, being great at F1 does not mean you're better, just different,
I can promise you that driving a vehicle capable of that sort of speed is categorically not about repetitive exactness as every lap means different levels of traction from the track and from your tyres, lowering fuel levels, aerodynamic efficiency depending on how close you are to the car in front.
Driving quickly competitively is about judging, feeling and responding to being on the very limit of traction.
-
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
A good example is Craig Lowndes.
Dominated super cars, went to Europe, got a seat beside Montoya in the same car. Then failed whilst Montoya went on.
And Nick Heidfeld. Both Montoya and Heidfeld made it into F1. All three of them from the same cars in Helmut Marko's team - the same Marko now in RBR.
Lowndes simply wasn't competitive.
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
@Machpants I love rallying. My parents did it. Smashing down a loose gravel or ice road requires tremendous talent, let alone in something like a Group B monster.
But track work; IMO there's a clear gradient from karts all the way to F1. It's the pinnacle because of the speed and hence lack of error margin.
I still disagree, F1 and similar races are very formulaic. It's about repetitive exactness, not necessarily driving skill. However you define that, being great at F1 does not mean you're better, just different,
this flies in the face of what I've been told by a pro racing driver friend of mine who raced against Jenson Button and Kimi R growing up in karting etc. He said, without question, the only person he's ever been on a track with who he just knew was faster, was Kimi, his feel for the braking point, the management of traction etc was just better.
F1 has always been a mixture of the very best and the very richest who can buy their way to a seat, sometimes not for very long. But as mentioned above, the guys that win multiple championships and a proportion of the grid beyond them are unquestionably the best drivers in the world in any format (excepting rallying as above).
-
-
Liam Lawson's rocky road to F1: 'My parents sold their house so I could keep racing'
Formula 1's latest full-time driver opens up on the journey from New Zealand to an RB seat as Daniel Ricciardo's replacement
Sacrifice, talent, luck.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Formula 1:
Finally!
Thrilled for him and his family. He gets to realise a childhood dream
-
-
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
From the Motorsport article next to the one linked
The announcement only confirmed Lawson for the remaining six grands prix of the current season, with no word on a drive in 2025 as Red Bull is keen to keep its options open within its driver line-ups across both squads..
-
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
-
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
I think is just his original contact which goes until 2025.
“ Lawson’s current contract with Red Bull contains a clause that he is free to leave, should he not be guaranteed a place on the 2025 grid by a certain date.”
He still isn’t guaranteed a place. Nobody is really!
-
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
Sauce. Could be wrong but it's close. I might have misunderstood though, but I thought he's pretty much locked in to drive next season for one of the RB teams
-
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.
I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.
Agreed they're different. The difference is they're slower and require less talent.
So incorrect that I will comment. Slower does not necessarily require less talent. Being able to maximise what you have to get the best out of the machine you are given is the skill.
It required considerably more talent to rally my Mini many years ago, than it would to do so in my RS4. It was an awful lot slower. Going faster does not require more talent per se, going faster in any given type does. Even then there is tyre management and other considerations that make up a top driver. It isn’t purely reaction time due to speed.
It could be argued that the slower types require more raw talent without all of the flash gear to go fast. Flying a tiger moth requires more talent than a modern trainer, it is a lot slower and a lot more dangerous. Have talent failure and you just crash slower.
None of that in any way implies that F1 is easier than the others! Just as I said, different, and that isn’t purely about speed.
-
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
@antipodean said in Formula 1:
Outside of rallying, they are all lesser series/ formulas.
I disagree. They are different. Drivers may very well be successful across them, and has been done before, but I'll leave it there.
Agreed they're different. The difference is they're slower and require less talent.
So incorrect that I will comment. Slower does not necessarily require less talent. Being able to maximise what you have to get the best out of the machine you are given is the skill.
It required considerably more talent to rally my Mini many years ago, than it would to do so in my RS4. It was an awful lot slower. Going faster does not require more talent per se, going faster in any given type does. Even then there is tyre management and other considerations that make up a top driver. It isn’t purely reaction time due to speed.
It could be argued that the slower types require more raw talent without all of the flash gear to go fast. Flying a tiger moth requires more talent than a modern trainer, it is a lot slower and a lot more dangerous. Have talent failure and you just crash slower.
None of that in any way implies that F1 is easier than the others! Just as I said, different, and that isn’t purely about speed.
Ignoring the equivocation, false dichotomy, post hoc fallacy we're left with the simple fact the argument that "going faster does not require more talent" is misleading. Going faster increases the demands on reflexes, decision-making, and precision. At higher speeds, the room for error decreases exponentially, meaning that the talent required to manage high-speed performance is not simply about reaction time but also mental processing speed, anticipation, and sustained focus under extreme pressure.
The analogy to riding holds here with the adage "It's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow." A slower bike, due to its simplicity, is more forgiving, and the threshold for reaching its performance ceiling is lower, making it easier for riders with less talent to feel they are achieving something substantial. The fast bike requires significantly more skill to reach its true limits. While a less talented rider may never come close to fully unlocking the potential of a fast bike, a more skilled rider can handle the increased complexity, power, and speed, and push the machine far closer to its true capabilities.
Literally anyone who has driven fast knows the complexities of controlling higher speeds, managing traction, braking distances, and making split-second decisions are far greater. Hence why motorsport has talent ceilings and MotoGP and F1 are their respective ceilings.
-
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
Sauce. Could be wrong but it's close. I might have misunderstood though, but I thought he's pretty much locked in to drive next season for one of the RB teams
To clarify, nothing is guaranteed, if he does really badly that could be it. But the fight for places at RB and the sister team is wide open, especially if Perez "retires"
-
@MajorRage said in Formula 1:
@Machpants said in Formula 1:
Six races left, I think, to cement his place. Hope he goes well
Nope. He has a contract for next year. These 5 races are just a move to give him reps early, in preparation for 2025
Where did you get this? Not read this anywhere
Sauce. Could be wrong but it's close. I might have misunderstood though, but I thought he's pretty much locked in to drive next season for one of the RB teams
To clarify, nothing is guaranteed, if he does really badly that could be it. But the fight for places at RB and the sister team is wide open, especially if Perez "retires"
That's quite a few words for...50/50 🎣
