Unpopular Motorsport Opinions

[Pete05]

It's part of the reason I'm getting more disenchanted with F1; the amplification of the petulance among a lot of the field is getting tiresome. It's not that cursing and whining weren't a part of the sport 30-40 years ago, but I think a lot of that comes down to the way F1 is managed for maximum attention-seeking targeted at the bottom of the barrel.

The racing isn't really that bad, just those pesky silver cars which tend to be really, really consistent is what takes a bit of the suspense away.

One thing that will turn me off F1 completely & rather rapidly, is if they don’t clamp down on political statements from individuals.
Yes, I’m looking at you Lewis.

It’s one thing to want to trumpet your opinion on a particular matter, but do so on your Instagram, Facebook or other personal platform.

When Lewis (or anyone else for that matter) is standing on the podium, not only is he representing himself, he’s up there as an ambassador for his & team’s sponsors.
It’s just not the time or place for it.

 

[XJ40]

It's part of the reason I'm getting more disenchanted with F1; the amplification of the petulance among a lot of the field is getting tiresome. It's not that cursing and whining weren't a part of the sport 30-40 years ago, but I think a lot of that comes down to the way F1 is managed for maximum attention-seeking targeted at the bottom of the barrel.

The racing isn't really that bad, just those pesky silver cars which tend to be really, really consistent is what takes a bit of the suspense away.

Thinking back over the last 5 or so years it seems to me that every time a driver thought he was wronged, he would get on the radio and say something was dangerous, unfair, or unsporting and for the team to mention this to race control. I'd rather see him get the red mist and take the place back through sheer grit and determination. The true overtake button seems to be the radio.

 

[ShiftingGears]

It's part of the reason I'm getting more disenchanted with F1; the amplification of the petulance among a lot of the field is getting tiresome. It's not that cursing and whining weren't a part of the sport 30-40 years ago, but I think a lot of that comes down to the way F1 is managed for maximum attention-seeking targeted at the bottom of the barrel.

The racing isn't really that bad, just those pesky silver cars which tend to be really, really consistent is what takes a bit of the suspense away.

Some of it is just dishonest misrepresentation

 

[MagpieRacer]

One thing that will turn me off F1 completely & rather rapidly, is if they don’t clamp down on political statements from individuals.
Yes, I’m looking at you Lewis.

It’s one thing to want to trumpet your opinion on a particular matter, but do so on your Instagram, Facebook or other personal platform.

When Lewis (or anyone else for that matter) is standing on the podium, not only is he representing himself, he’s up there as an ambassador for his & team’s sponsors.
It’s just not the time or place for it.

Couldn't disagree more. He's using his elevated platform to bring awareness to an issue close to his heart. He isn't stupid enough to these things without prior clearance from his team and sponsors and Mercedes have always said they will back him no matter what. It's also borderline as to whether racial injustice can be considered political.

I personally think anyone who takes issue with it, is part of the problem itself.

 

[Jimlaad43]

Couldn't disagree more. He's using his elevated platform to bring awareness to an issue close to his heart. He isn't stupid enough to these things without prior clearance from his team and sponsors and Mercedes have always said they will back him no matter what. It's also borderline as to whether racial injustice can be considered political.

I personally think anyone who takes issue with it, is part of the problem itself.

Exactly.

This isn't a Political statement in support of a specific party. Lewis isn't exactly going around with "Trump 2020" on his car like some idiot in NASCAR, he's literally supporting racial equality - something that the world has needed for centuries. When you have a big voice and a big platform, why waste the opportunity? If anything, he'd get more criticism for not speaking up against it from black rights activists for wasting the opportunity.

It's like the stupid criticism that the Lesbian comedian Susan Calman got when she went on Strictly Come Dancing a few years ago. LGBT activists slated her for not dancing in a same-sex couple with a woman, and she basically had to spend her first episode defending herself for wanting to dance with a man.



Should Martin Luther King just stayed as a priest and not stood up for blatant discrimination against him and other black people for something they were stuck in from the moment they were born. No of course not. Lewis is the only black man in a sport which has historically been white dominated, and he is the best driver in the field - right on the brink of becoming the Greatest of All Time. Leave a legacy of doing the right thing, as well as just being the best at the sport.

If his T-Shirts have made you uncomfortable, good. Sit back and think "why does this make me uncomfortable? Oh wait, does that make me racist? Perhaps it does, maybe I need to rethink my attitude."

 

[MatskiMonk]

I personally think anyone who takes issue with it, is part of the problem itself.

If his T-Shirts have made you uncomfortable, good. Sit back and think "why does this make me uncomfortable? Oh wait, does that make me racist? Perhaps it does, maybe I need to rethink my attitude."

Promoting a societal change is one thing... using your popularity to get legal action taken upon individuals for a specific alleged crime isn't the same thing to me, if it makes me uncomfortable it's because we shouldn't be promoting trial-by-media, or a situation where the greater exposure someone has, the more they could influence a criminal case - that should just be about facts... not opinions or popularity - which is what promoting societal change is about. It's two different things.

 

[TenEightyOne]

When Lewis (or anyone else for that matter) is standing on the podium, not only is he representing himself, he’s up there as an ambassador for his & team’s sponsors.
It’s just not the time or place for it.

Then it's fortunate that he has their support in that. Why wouldn't he have?

One thing that will turn me off F1 completely & rather rapidly, is if they don’t clamp down on political statements from individuals.
Yes, I’m looking at you Lewis.

I can't think of a political statement from him inside F1, unless you think racial oppression is "politics"?

It’s one thing to want to trumpet your opinion on a particular matter, but do so on your Instagram, Facebook or other personal platform.

As long as he keeps away from politics he can do what he likes. I'm wondering why the message seems to upset you so much?

 

[Pete05]

Well, I'm so glad my last post here is in the most appropriate thread.

The response received also reminds me of why you don't see me wasting my time in the toxic O&CE thread, attempting rational discussion with the selectively blind.

 

[Dotini]

In the Game of Thrones fantasy a great deal of importance was set upon "bending the knee". In the books and the TV show, and I expect in the real medieval world, bending the knee signified defeat in combat, personal submission, and enduring political, military and even religious fealty to the victor who was above you. It was and still is a highly symbolic and meaningful real-world act. My guess is that a lot of contemporary people are cognizant of the symbolic meaning of bending the knee, and are reluctant to take part in an overt political, military and possibly even religiously symbolic act which becomes impossible to undo once it's performed openly in public.

 

[Scaff]

One thing that will turn me off F1 completely & rather rapidly, is if they don’t clamp down on political statements from individuals.
Yes, I’m looking at you Lewis.

It’s one thing to want to trumpet your opinion on a particular matter, but do so on your Instagram, Facebook or other personal platform.

When Lewis (or anyone else for that matter) is standing on the podium, not only is he representing himself, he’s up there as an ambassador for his & team’s sponsors.
It’s just not the time or place for it.

It's not a political issue, its a human right and civil rights issue.

That aside both the sport and his team are supportive of it, its does however raise the question of why you would target LH alone and not the rest of the grid, teams and sport as a whole?

 

[Pete05]

It's not a political issue, its a human right and civil rights issue.

That aside both the sport and his team are supportive of it, its does however raise the question of why you would target LH alone and not the rest of the grid, teams and sport as a whole?

LH wearing the t-shirt with the message is what gained media coverage & prompted me to respond.

 

[Scaff]

LH wearing the t-shirt with the message is what gained media coverage & prompted me to respond.

Which you saw as something it isn't.

It's still not a political issue, it's a civil and human rights issue.

 

[merseyxshore]

Couldn't disagree more. He's using his elevated platform to bring awareness to an issue close to his heart. He isn't stupid enough to these things without prior clearance from his team and sponsors and Mercedes have always said they will back him no matter what. It's also borderline as to whether racial injustice can be considered political.

I personally think anyone who takes issue with it, is part of the problem itself.

Which you saw as something it isn't.

It's still not a political issue, it's a civil and human rights issue.

Absolutely. Fan responses to the BLM movement in F1 have largely been disgusting to be honest. Just reading the comments on F1 social media posts is so depressing. Imagine fuming that much about basic human rights.

As much as I wish it were otherwise, motorsport is filled with the same kind of gammon that get red-faced over vegan sausage rolls and repeat things like "you can't say anything anymore". That's not even an unpopular opinion, just a sad fact.

 

[Dotini]

Once racing cars wore national colors and even swastikas as symbols of national pride and industry. Then they wore the colors of tobacco and alcohol as symbols of wealth and success. Now they wear the didactic pinks and slogans affirmed by corporate HR as socially virtuous. But really it's always about attitudes and values rather than virtues. I'll be most impressed when the Uyghur cause is advanced on the grid of the Chinese GP.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Then they wore the colors of tobacco and alcohol as symbols of wealth and success.

Um, I not sure that's how sponsorship works.

Absolutely. Fan responses to the BLM movement in F1 have largely been disgusting to be honest. Just reading the comments on F1 social media posts is so depressing. Imagine fuming that much about basic human rights.

As much as I wish it were otherwise, motorsport is filled with the same kind of gammon that get red-faced over vegan sausage rolls and repeat things like "you can't say anything anymore". That's not even an unpopular opinion, just a sad fact.

I'm lucky enough to be able to watch motorsport in my local pub... always an environment rife with 'gammon'. The gestures made have gotten mixed reactions. The hypocrisy of privileged people making a token gesture, and, this isn't the place for it, are the two most common reactions. I class anyone that didn't complain about it as a positive reaction to be honest.

Personally I think Bubba Wallace's drive to the grid at Talladega sent a far more powerful message, but that's just me.

 

[Simmpa]

Honda was right to leave F1 as the sport been shrinking rapidly in popularity and the rule makers refuse to listen to the fans

 

[Dotini]

Honda was right to leave F1 as the sport been shrinking rapidly in popularity and the rule makers refuse to listen to the fans

When was top level Grand Prix racing ever about the fans? Certainly not at the beginning in 1906, and certainly not now. Maybe occasionally somewhere in between?

 

[Frank McGank]

When was top level Grand Prix racing ever about the fans? Certainly not at the beginning in 1906, and certainly not now. Maybe occasionally somewhere in between?

In modern motorsport where racing is presented and sold as entertainment, the fans are the consumers. It stands to reason that they should try and keep them entertained so that they’ll, you know, keep watching. Allowing one team and one driver run away with it for the better part of a decade WILL destroy the F1 brand and the fan loyalty. You can talk about “muh motorsport ‘tegridy” but let’s be real. F1 binned any semblance of authentic motorsport the day they started clamping down on tech innovations to try and increase parity.
First the banning of ‘nonstandard’ engines in the early 80s, then banning turbos in the late 80s, then making the cars narrower and heavier to try and reduce grip and produce slower lap times in the early and late 90s, then downsizing engines and restricting them to a single layout in the late 90s, then downsizing the engines again in the mid 00s, then banning pitstops to specifically punish Ferrari in 2005, the multiple artificial qualifying formats tested throughout the 00s to add manufactured drama, then making the cars heavier and aerodynamically simpler in the late 00s to slow them down, then deliberately awful tyres so as to make overtakes more likely as a driver’s tyres go away, And so on. F1 hasn’t been a purebreed racing category since the time you could run a supercharged V16 against a helicopter turbine, and a four wheel drive car against a 6 wheeled car.

 

[TonyJZX]

I feel that singling out Mercedes for being 'too good' ignores the fact that every era has its dominant forces.

I feel like I'm privileged to be of age to have seen several drivers and teams who were 'best of their gen' and perhaps 'best there's ever been.'

I saw Senna race. I watch McLaren Honda win 15/16 races. I lived thru that dreadful era where Schumacher dominated with Ferrari. I watched Vettel beat one of my favourites, Mark Webber and now we see that the truly greatest driver of all time is here... I hate to say it but on the record, that's Hamilton.

I was also there wondering why Hamilton would ever leave McLaren to go to Mercedes, a young but very much 2nd rate team.

I personally dont have huge interest in F1. It is stagnant. I think Liberty have done a worse job. I think the car going down this hybrid path is a dead end.

I think they should be going to an alternative fuel but still piston engine design. Like maybe a hot vee turbo 2.0 litre v8... w/ 7 spd gearbox.

About Hamilton's social justice leanings. He's a black man. Sure he's English but he has some sympathies for American blacks. I'm ok with this.

I'm a bit actually embarrassed for largely white folk who disparage famous black folks for using their fame to champion for black issues.

Its the same with Kapaernik who did the big time crime of kneeling during the game anthem.

It smacks of white people requesting famous blacks and their liberal hollywood surrogates to "shut up and dribble". its a bit dehumanising to expect say a black driver to "just drive" becuase that's all we want to ever hear in our safe space from black folks.

Famous people have a voice. Hamilton isnt just a driver. He has a right to express himself however he likes. If the message makes you uncomfortable then its worked.

You can bet that if famous white folk use their platform to champion for white issues (whatever that may be... blue lives matter?) then these same folks would have no problem with it. I wonder why.

 

[Frank McGank]

I feel that singling out Mercedes for being 'too good' ignores the fact that every era has its dominant forces.

I feel like I'm privileged to be of age to have seen several drivers and teams who were 'best of their gen' and perhaps 'best there's ever been.'

I saw Senna race. I watch McLaren Honda win 15/16 races. I lived thru that dreadful era where Schumacher dominated with Ferrari. I watched Vettel beat one of my favourites, Mark Webber and now we see that the truly greatest driver of all time is here... I hate to say it but on the record, that's Hamilton.

I was also there wondering why Hamilton would ever leave McLaren to go to Mercedes, a young but very much 2nd rate team.

I personally dont have huge interest in F1. It is stagnant. I think Liberty have done a worse job. I think the car going down this hybrid path is a dead end.

I think they should be going to an alternative fuel but still piston engine design. Like maybe a hot vee turbo 2.0 litre v8... w/ 7 spd gearbox.

About Hamilton's social justice leanings. He's a black man. Sure he's English but he has some sympathies for American blacks. I'm ok with this.

I'm a bit actually embarrassed for largely white folk who disparage famous black folks for using their fame to champion for black issues.

Its the same with Kapaernik who did the big time crime of kneeling during the game anthem.

It smacks of white people requesting famous blacks and their liberal hollywood surrogates to "shut up and dribble". its a bit dehumanising to expect say a black driver to "just drive" becuase that's all we want to ever hear in our safe space from black folks.

Famous people have a voice. Hamilton isnt just a driver. He has a right to express himself however he likes. If the message makes you uncomfortable then its worked.

You can bet that if famous white folk use their platform to champion for white issues (whatever that may be... blue lives matter?) then these same folks would have no problem with it. I wonder why.

If you look through history, you’ll find that prior to the 90s it was essentially unheard-of for a driver to win multiple championships in a row. A team/driver would dominate one season, then the next season another driver/would. Only 1 driver won multiple championships in a row between 1960 and 1990: Alain Prost in 85 and 86. Meanwhile since 1998, only 4 seasons have been won by someone who didn’t win it multiple times in a row: 2007 with Raikkonen, 2008 with Lewis, 2009 with Jenson, and 2016 with Rosberg. Multiseason domination is absolutely a new thing. A big part of Senna’s infamy specifically comes from the fact he could win multiple seasons in a row, because of how rare that was back then.

If F1 wants to survive, they need to stop playing the road relevancy card. It’s just a dogwhistle the big OEMs at Renault and Mercedes use to price out all the smaller engine shops. F1’s only hope for sustainability is to court back the likes of Cosworth and Judd. They’ll keep making ICE layouts for as long as there exists a flammable liquid to fuel them.

Slightly off-topic on Lewis’ political stances:

Spoiler

Lewis can say what he wants, fans can respond how they want. That’s the beauty of free speech. But the people who work 9-5 to make a handful of peanuts do not want to flick on the telly on their day off to hear the highest-paid and most respected athlete in the world talk down to them about how he is being oppressed by them. It smacks of racism against white people when you go around blaming white people for all the ills of society, and saying white people should be ashamed for existing, and that white society is inherently evil and must be demolished. It makes people think “if he hates us and the country so much, why is he still here? If he wants to be safe amongst his own kind, why doesn’t he go live with his own kind?” It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out what path that logic eventually goes down.
If he wants to be a black nationalist, that’s fine. He’s got every right to believe what he wants, being a citizen of the freest and most egalitarian society to ever exist in human history. But he should expect white nationalists to respond in kind. If every other race can be ethnic nationalists, it’s only fair white people can be as well. Either everyone can be an ethnic nationalist or nobody can. The only way to stop white nationalists is to stop providing them with the ammunition they use to justify their beliefs. Hitler didn’t fall arse-backwards into the chancellorship, after all.
Besides, BLM isn’t even really about Police Brutality issues, so much as it is about Marxism and the desire to dismantle western society and replace it with ‘Afrocentrism’, which is some wacko conspiracy theory that says Africans created all the societies on the planet and were the most advanced people in history and that barbarian Europeans spent centuries erasing this fact from the history record so they could subjugate black people for all eternity. BLM as an organisation states and believes this. I don’t think LEWIS prescribes to this belief, and I’d wager most of the people going around on twitter chanting it don’t either. They just see ‘social justice’ and mindlessly click ‘share’. It’s just not a good organisation to support. It’s hateful and bigoted and espouses a conspiracy theory on the level of “the Jews are trying to make white people go extinct”. It flies directly in the face of what the civil rights movement was originally about. So when Lewis says it and promotes that organisation, he’s unwittingly promoting a conspiracy theory and the belief European civilisation should be destroyed. So unless he believes that stuff, he should probably stop saying it. This isn’t even mentioning the fact he’s got a lot of the basic facts wrong on the cases he’s so worried about. Media sensationalised justified uses of force for ratings because “innocent black man ruthlessly slaughtered by evil white cop” makes for good 9 o clock news.

 

[TonyJZX]

I feel that its useless to try to reach too far back into history of F1 and try to justify why things in 2020 arent how they were like in 1975. The things that happen in the past cant happen today. I still remember working in schools a decade ago, maybe more and talking to young alleged "motorsport fans" who have never heard of Senna.

There are things that happen that cannot happen today. I dont expect things to go back to the way they were 40-50yrs ago. I remember things like how an Australian won the DC in a car of his own design, with an engine of his own design. Or how a race team won the DC in their debut year. These things are fairy tales and impossible today.

I am not sure how Liberty proceeds to make F1 great again (so to speak). Liberty itself doesnt know.

And onto the second thing. I see a lot of white fragility You want poor black folks to shut up and take it and you want rich black folks to shut up and take it.

Its amazing to me that people are so annoyed that a black man can be the #1 there's ever been in an white mans sport and thats all it takes to want Hamilton to go back to Grenada with all the other black folks. When you have to defend white nationalism or any nationalism and Hitler then you should be asking yourself how you go to this position. Its amazing to me that Hamilton has aroused this sort of backlash.

Im almost amazed that people will reach so far into interpreting peoples actions into some kind of anti white fervour.

At this point I guess Breonna Taylor got what she deserved.

 

[Liquid]

Liberty Media's F1 presentation and YouTube presence is way better now than it used to be. Do some of the compilations still need a few tweaks? Yeah, sure they do. But it's way better than the no-frills, instaban FOM era.

As for the actual rules of the Formula, I don't know how much direct input and influence LM has. I'm fairly certain the FIA is at least as equal to blame. But it is boring, not questioning that.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Its amazing to me that people are so annoyed that a black man can be the #1 there's ever been in an white mans sport and that's all it takes to want Hamilton to go back to Grenada with all the other black folks.

Two questions, do you actually see people annoyed by this? And, do you think people specifically consider it a white mans sport?

 

[Frank McGank]

Two questions, do you actually see people annoyed by this? And, do you think people specifically consider it a white mans sport?

He was calling me a white nationalist because I objectively explained how Lewis’ actions can lead to people becoming white nationalists. Because apparently approaching the situation with any level of nuance greater than ‘unquestioningly kiss the feet of anyone who says Black Lives Matter’ makes you literally Hitler.

 

[Grand Prix]

If you look through history, you’ll find that prior to the 90s it was essentially unheard-of for a driver to win multiple championships in a row. A team/driver would dominate one season, then the next season another driver/would. Only 1 driver won multiple championships in a row between 1960 and 1990: Alain Prost in 85 and 86. Meanwhile since 1998, only 4 seasons have been won by someone who didn’t win it multiple times in a row: 2007 with Raikkonen, 2008 with Lewis, 2009 with Jenson, and 2016 with Rosberg. Multiseason domination is absolutely a new thing. A big part of Senna’s infamy specifically comes from the fact he could win multiple seasons in a row, because of how rare that was back then.

Firstly, one of the main factors that has prevented star drivers from winning as many championships as they could, was the issue of reliability. For example, Jim Clark could possibly have been a 4 or 5 times World Champion had he drove cars that were as reliable as they are now, but building reliable cars wasn't really a thing at Colin Chapman's Lotus: "He used to build cars so they needed a complete rebuild after every race, but that was precisely the idea. He'd say they only need to do 250 miles so if they break down after 260 then we're doing it about right. Of course what happened was they very often broke at about 240..." - Peter Warr

Not to ignore the 1950s, yes, the '50s were a chaotic time for Formula 1, but this brings me to my next point: The changes in regulations that occurred throughout Grand Prix history. Changes in the rules often bring about newfound domination for one team. That's good if you happened to be in what would become the dominant team (like what happened with Caracciola, Ascari, Fangio, and Hamilton), but bad if you weren't. What usually happens is, the rules change, a team dominates for a little while, and then everyone else eventually catches up, at which point you get a better diversity of winners. The Cosworth DFV Era was a period of relative stability in the rules, and resulted in many different winners, both constructors and drivers.

I realize Schumacher's dominance came about in a period of relative stability, but again, this was enabled in-part by bulletproof reliability.

The FIA should consider that F1 may need ongoing development for it's own benefit. I say give them 100kg of fuel and tell them that they can use any engine type they want. If someone can somehow make 100kg of fuel last a race distance with a 1 litre V12, that's great. Others might be more sane and make a 1.5L 4 cylinder instead, which is fine. Just to see what they come up with. One team would get it right first, but the other teams would have options, and catch up eventually.

 

[Frank McGank]

Firstly, one of the main factors that has prevented star drivers from winning as many championships as they could, was the issue of reliability. For example, Jim Clark could possibly have been a 4 or 5 times World Champion had he drove cars that were as reliable as they are now, but building reliable cars wasn't really a thing at Colin Chapman's Lotus: "He used to build cars so they needed a complete rebuild after every race, but that was precisely the idea. He'd say they only need to do 250 miles so if they break down after 260 then we're doing it about right. Of course what happened was they very often broke at about 240..." - Peter Warr

Not to ignore the 1950s, yes, the '50s were a chaotic time for Formula 1, but this brings me to my next point: The changes in regulations that occurred throughout Grand Prix history. Changes in the rules often bring about newfound domination for one team. That's good if you happened to be in what would become the dominant team (like what happened with Caracciola, Ascari, Fangio, and Hamilton), but bad if you weren't. What usually happens is, the rules change, a team dominates for a little while, and then everyone else eventually catches up, at which point you get a better diversity of winners. The Cosworth DFV Era was a period of relative stability in the rules, and resulted in many different winners, both constructors and drivers.

I realize Schumacher's dominance came about in a period of relative stability, but again, this was enabled in-part by bulletproof reliability.

The FIA should consider that F1 may need ongoing development for it's own benefit. I say give them 100kg of fuel and tell them that they can use any engine type they want. If someone can somehow make 100kg of fuel last a race distance with a 1 litre V12, that's great. Others might be more sane and make a 1.5L 4 cylinder instead, which is fine. Just to see what they come up with. One team would get it right first, but the other teams would have options, and catch up eventually.

Reliability was such a factor because the engines were only designed to last one session. As Chapman put it: “the best engine is the one that lets go 10 feet after the finish line”. Throughout the 00s, there was a strong push to make engines last multiple races, with the hopes of eliminating reliability from the equation AND lowering costs because teams wouldn’t have to buy a dozen engines every weekend. Unfortunately, we saw the opposite affect as we did with all the other regulations intended to increase parity. Sure, the engines last longer. But they’re also turned right down. Which means any engine supplier that can make a powerful engine has an even larger advantage than historically because it means they can turn their engine down more than other teams and last even longer. This is what Mercedes does with their ‘party mode’. Their engines make far more power than everyone elses’, so they can afford to put them down to 50% of the beans and still maintain a pace advantage. Meanwhile, the other suppliers have to squeeze every last pony out of a drop of petrol and its why their engines go bang constantly whilst Merc can go a whole season without a DNF. This is combined with the fact it costs significantly more money to develop an engine that can last ⅓ of the season than it does just to buy new engines every weekend. That’s one of the major reasons why no other engine supplier wants to join; the costs.
get rid of the engine limitations and all the teams will have to turn their engines up to 11 every saturday and sunday to have a hope of winning, which means engines will be designed to only go the 305km race distance and not a foot more. Which means we’ll see far more DNFs.

From 1966 to 1983, the rules didn’t really change. Yet there was no pattern of ‘less and less domination’. The championship traded between Lotus/McLaren/Tyrrell until 1973, and then Lotus/McLaren/Ferrari until 1980. No one team dominated more than the others, and conversely there also wasn’t a reduction in domination from any team. As soon as one came up with something innovative and new, there’s a good chance they’d dominate. Then the next season, their competitors would respond with either a refined version of the innovation or simply come up with something novel for themselves. The 1966 rules changes didn’t really affect Lotus’ advantage they had had since 1963, and the rules changes for 1983 didn’t really hurt McLaren or Williams who were the top teams at the time. It’s only been since the 90s when ‘new regulations=new multi-season dominance from one team’. Because, as I said, those new rules were designed to make the cars more similar and neuter performance. Meaning it becomes a game of diminishing returns. Who has the 10 million quid to find an extra 200 revs and an extra 10bhp?
Want an idea of what these ‘parity’ regulations have done? In 1986 the most powerful engines had, in race trim, 850bhp; 880bhp, 920bhp, and 960bhp. An over 100 horsepower spread, yet teams running all four of those engines could win on pace on a semi-regular basis. And that’s not even looking at qualifying engines where there could be upwards of a 200 horsepower difference. In 2019, the gap between the most powerful and least powerful engine is estimated to be somewhere between 30 and 40bhp. And yet look at how utterly dominant the Merc is. The trick fuel flow thing Ferrari used to be so much faster last year was supposedly only worth about 15-20bhp.

 

[MatskiMonk]

He was calling me a white nationalist because I objectively explained how Lewis’ actions can lead to people becoming white nationalists

I don't think you were that objective to be honest... People might not like Lewis making his stance a feature of the race weekend, but as far as I know he's not said these things:

blame white people for all the ills of society

white people should be ashamed for existing

white society is inherently evil and must be demolished

.. that you attribute to creating white nationalists. Yes there might be elements within some of the groups/organisations that support or claim to be part of the BLM movement that say those things, and yes I'm sure Lewis supports the idea of Black Lives Matter, but that doesn't mean Lewis supports the fringe elements of all those groups. I doubt he thinks his mum should be ashamed for existing, is evil, or is responsible for all the ills of society...

Similarly, I think @TonyJZX is painting a picture of Lewis's detractors that's not entirely fair either. My dislike for him has nothing to do with him being black and everything to do with him coming across as a bit of **** since his first season in F1. I also don't think motorsport is itself a white mans sport, it discriminates mostly against the poor irrespective of skin colour IMHO, and let's be real, here in the UK black ethnic groups are a very small percentage of the population*, for every 100 white hopefuls there are, there's only going to be a few black ones just thanks to simple numbers, and only a tiny percentage of that entire group will ever make it because most people can't afford it. Lewis is himself proof that you don't have to be white or over privileged to make it in motorsport, but it doesn't change the fact that it's an opportunity that only a tiny percentage get anyway.

Spoiler: * UK Ethnic Breakdown

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures...ations/population-of-england-and-wales/latest

• according to the 2011 Census, the total population of England and Wales was 56.1 million, and 86.0% of the population was White
• people from Asian ethnic groups made up the second largest percentage of the population (at 7.5%), followed by Black ethnic groups (at 3.3%), Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups (at 2.2%) and Other ethnic groups (at 1.0%)
• among the specific ethnic groups, people from the White British ethnic group made up the largest percentage of the population (at 80.5%), followed by Other White (4.4%) and Indian (2.5%)
• from 2001 to 2011, the percentage of the population of England and Wales that was White British decreased from 87.4% to 80.5%, while the Other White group saw the largest increase in their share of the population, from 2.6% to 4.4%
• the percentage of the population from a Black African background doubled from 0.9% in 2001 to 1.8% in 2011

 

[Frank McGank]

I don't think you were that objective to be honest... People might not like Lewis making his stance a feature of the race weekend, but as far as I know he's not said these things:







.. that you attribute to creating white nationalists. Yes there might be elements within some of the groups/organisations that support or claim to be part of the BLM movement that say those things, and yes I'm sure Lewis supports the idea of Black Lives Matter, but that doesn't mean Lewis supports the fringe elements of all those groups. I doubt he thinks his mum should be ashamed for existing, is evil, or is responsible for all the ills of society...

Similarly, I think @TonyJZX is painting a picture of Lewis's detractors that's not entirely fair either. My dislike for him has nothing to do with him being black and everything to do with him coming across as a bit of **** since his first season in F1. I also don't think motorsport is itself a white mans sport, it discriminates mostly against the poor irrespective of skin colour IMHO, and let's be real, here in the UK black ethnic groups are a very small percentage of the population*, for every 100 white hopefuls there are, there's only going to be a few black ones just thanks to simple numbers, and only a tiny percentage of that entire group will ever make it because most people can't afford it. Lewis is himself proof that you don't have to be white or over privileged to make it in motorsport, but it doesn't change the fact that it's an opportunity that only a tiny percentage get anyway.

Spoiler: * UK Ethnic Breakdown

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures...ations/population-of-england-and-wales/latest

• according to the 2011 Census, the total population of England and Wales was 56.1 million, and 86.0% of the population was White
• people from Asian ethnic groups made up the second largest percentage of the population (at 7.5%), followed by Black ethnic groups (at 3.3%), Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups (at 2.2%) and Other ethnic groups (at 1.0%)
• among the specific ethnic groups, people from the White British ethnic group made up the largest percentage of the population (at 80.5%), followed by Other White (4.4%) and Indian (2.5%)
• from 2001 to 2011, the percentage of the population of England and Wales that was White British decreased from 87.4% to 80.5%, while the Other White group saw the largest increase in their share of the population, from 2.6% to 4.4%
• the percentage of the population from a Black African background doubled from 0.9% in 2001 to 1.8% in 2011

It’s what BLM as an organisation states, and by supporting them, he’s saying he agrees with those principles. Like I said in my prior comment, I don’t think HE necessarily believes that, he just takes the name at face value and runs with it. It’s what most people who support it do. But the people who oppose it are the ones who have done research on what BLM really is. And that’s why they’ll start thinking as I described. Having an organisation that goes around destroying cultural monuments in the name of ‘social justice’, beating and killing white people for supposedly being ‘fascist’, destroying billions-worth of private property in international riots and looting, and making entire governments kowtow to a group of people who make up a fraction of the population is going to make some people start thinking a certain way. As I said, Hitler didn’t just wake up as chancellor one day. He was created by an environment where he seemed like the sensible option. And I worry that with the militant actions of BLM and other far-left political groups, the environment will again become such that someone like Hitler starts to sound like the sensible alternative.

of course Lewis loves his mum, but he’s also said he doesn’t see himself as white but rather as black. He’s, genetically and culturally, just as much a white man as he is a black man but has said publicly he exclusively sees himself as black. Which means he doesn’t value his white side as much as his black. That in itself doesn’t really mean anything, but it helps build a case for *some* people.

 

[ImaRobot]

But the people who oppose it are the ones who have done research on what BLM really is.

Just as there are those that paint a negative picture inside one organization, the very same is happening within the other. Those that "do their research" should be able to differentiate those from the actual movement. The movement is less about WhItE MaN BaD, and if that's all you got from it, than it makes sense why literally everything you described reeks undertones of racism while simultaneously misunderstanding it. That you decided to use those extreme point of views as some sort of point, as if that's actually the message which is trying to be portrayed, makes it pretty glaring.

Unfortunately, people will focus on the bad apples first, and I get that. Try not to let that cloud your judgement when you clamor about being objective.

 

[Frank McGank]

Just as there are those that paint a negative picture inside one organization, the very same is happening within the other. Those that "do their research" should be able to differentiate those from the actual movement. The movement is less about WhItE MaN BaD, and if that's all you got from it, than it makes sense why literally everything you described reeks undertones of racism while simultaneously misunderstanding it. That you decided to use those extreme point of views as some sort of point, as if that's actually the message which is trying to be portrayed, makes it pretty glaring.

Unfortunately, people will focus on the bad apples first, and I get that. Try not to let that cloud your judgement when you clamor about being objective.

The only racists are BLM.
https://www.westernjournal.com/blm-...enetically-defective-said-blacks-superhumans/
https://www.weaselzippers.us/284283-video-black-lives-matter-activist-shouts-kill-all-white-babies/
https://www.dailywire.com/news/black-lives-matter-leader-pens-list-10-demands-amanda-prestigiacomo
https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder-describes-herself-as-trained-marxist/
https://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/black-lives-matter-philly-bans-white-people-from-its-meetings/