Amongst the minority sports that receive excessive media coverage, few can be as perplexing to the non-aficionado as Formula 1 racing.

From what I can see, it consists of lots of cars driving around in a circle over and over again for 60 "laps" until someone waves a flag and then it stops. Just to make it even more tedious, the day before the race, they have a dress rehearsal called "qualifying", which seems daft as surely all the cars have already qualified to be in the big race?

The winner is, unless he makes a bad error, the driver who's got the best car, which this year is Lewis Hamilton. Surely this goes against the whole competitive ethos of sport - that all competitors are equal? You wouldn't have a football match between a fully able team and another which has to play with their legs tied together, so why do they all drive different brands of car, some of which are clearly much better than others.

Surely the only way to make Formula 1 both fair and interesting is to have all the drivers racing in the same type of car, otherwise whoever wins hasn't actually won on ability, just on the quality of their vehicle.

Can anyone explain?

thats whats planned for next year, the FIA are bringing in LOTS of rules to make the cars much much similar.

If you want to watch racing like you describe- try A1 GP on sky- everyones car is the same on that.

You should try watching NASCAR if you think F1's boring. The track's just an oval. For every race.

But then again, this did happen once. Amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3vDOKELJso&feature=related

its the pinnacle of motor racing, bleeding edge technology with the best drivers. i prefer rally myself but f1 is good.

F1 is dull dull dull. Much prefer touring cars myself.

I swear down they should throw out every technical limitation going, as long as there is a human driver able to steer left and right and who is also safe, EVERYTHING and ANYTHING should be allowed. That'd make it fun. Oh, but the tech details should also be available coz it's only the real geeky stuff I like.

Either that, or they need to have a series of random sprinkler events in each race where the track gets flooded. That'd be cool.

Racing is said to improve the breed. Many of the advancements from F1 have made it onto production cars, especially in the area of active safety.

Unfortunately, as Fivetide says, regulations have been brought in to limit the technical advancements being made.

F1 is a true World Championship (unlike the Baseball 'World' series). I has lost a little sparkle due to the rule changes, and I have to admit that there are far more entertaining races to spectate at; Le Mans used to be excellent, unfortunately it now seems to be a French beer festival for British 'Chavs'; BTCC always provides close racing, and plenty of action; even some of the 'club' races can provide more spectacle.

F1 does however bring along a Circus of followers, which add to it's vibrancy and colour. I lost count of the number of Helicopter Transfers into Silverstone on Sunday.

Then of course there are the 'Pit girls'.. ;)

It's not like football which is a competition between 22 blokes, racing is a competition between man+machine together. Hence why every car is different.

And the point is to finish first, any fool can see that.

If the sport is so pointless, how come BBC and ITV keep competing for the license to show it in England?

I'm of the opinion if I don't like something, I don't comment and look a fool!

What are you into, lacrosse?

If the sport is so pointless, how come BBC and ITV keep competing for the license to show it in England?

Popularity is no indicator of quality; lots of people watch Eastenders and buy Westlife records, but they're still wrong.

I'm of the opinion if I don't like something, I don't comment and look a fool!

Who's looking like a fool? I said I couldn't see the point of it and detailed the reasons why. Then people who do like Formula 1 racing explained why they felt it did have a point. Nowt foolish about that; learning other people's viewpoints and why they hold them is one of the most interesting things about this forum.

What are you into, lacrosse?

No, football - a sport where skill, human endeavour and talent can, at its best, transcend sport and become a form of artistic self-expression. You can't really say the same of motor racing, can you?

Is it not just a metaphor for life? We go 'round and 'round without ever getting anywhere, but by changing the shape of the circuit and increasing the speed we go somehow we convince ourselves that life is worthwhile.

Popularity is no indicator of quality


Actually, it is the only indicator of quality, if the subject under discussion is some form of entertainment. It's only any good if it entertains people; and the more of them it entertains, the better it is.

I'm bored of F1 these days- I'd much prefer to watch touring cars, rally, Superbikes or MotoGP.

A decent bike race makes virtually all car races look boring.

A decent bike race makes virtually all car races look boring.

And yet bike racing bores me to tears; even though there does seem to be more going on in it.

No, football - a sport where skill, human endeavour and talent can, at its best, transcend sport and become a form of artistic self-expression. You can't really say the same of motor racing, can you?

Have you never seen Schumacher, or Hamilton drive in the rain? You could almost describe the mastery they show to be art.

The level of bravery and car control they exhibit is humbling.

There's a simple solution for those that don't like/understand F1 - don't watch it. Even though it's generally on at a time when sitting in garden often takes priority, I imagine they'll be a whole swell of "I don't want my licence fee used for that" opinions when it moves to BBC next year.
I can't wait for that - no more "Your ever so precious Coronation Street drivel has been delayed by 10 minutes" banners at the bottom of the screen on the later races ;)

Have you never seen.... Hamilton drive in the rain? You could almost describe the mastery..... to be art....
With the exception of China last year ;)

Part of the problem with the 'art' arguement is that the vast majority of F1 fans and detractors probably have no real understanding of what level of skill the drivers are exhibiting. It's far more subtle than say Rallying.

I remember reading a quote from John Watson who was commenting on observing Senna flash past him in a race early on in his (Senna's) career at Brands, going up Hailwood into Druids. Watson said he could only marvel at what Senna was doing with the car. The inputs to steering and braking/acceleration were on another level, and it came as a real eye opener, even to someone of his experience.

I'm sure in this modern 'electronic aid' era that the requirement for some of that skill has been removed, but I'm sure there still exists a level of craftsmanship that most of us are unable to appreciate.

F1 racing is like drinkin a Guiness..u have to aquire the taste..

F1 is much better when it rains, Silverstone this year was a great race, more action, more overtaking, less predictable.

Something needs to be done to even the playing field and encourage overtaking, perhaps bring back full slick tyres and slow the cars down by limiting engine power rather than taking away mechanical grip needed for overtaking (ie. grooved tyres).

Surely the only way to make Formula 1 both fair and interesting is to have all the drivers racing in the same type of car, otherwise whoever wins hasn't actually won on ability, just on the quality of their vehicle.

Can anyone explain?

This what made last year so interesting. Both Alonso, the World Champion and Hamilton, the newcomer both had exactly the same car.

F1 racing is like drinkin a Guiness..u have to aquire the taste..

Guiness is a poor comparison.

australian v8 supercars is where it's at if you want exciting racing, check them out is hard core