F1: Then vs. Now

darkmarlin16 said:I’ve sat through that documentary at least two or three times now, and honestly? I could probably go watch it one more time 🙏

ruggedhawk20 said:Answer these questions for me

Is a race where nobody overtakes basically just a soccer match that ends 0-0?

How many overtakes actually happen in track and field?

How many goals are there in basketball?

What exactly did the world champion win—some specific race or some imaginary one that never even happened?

What even is an overtake?

Can a slower person actually pass a faster one?

If they can't, then what's the actual problem here?

Isn't it a total logical paradox—having the faster guy stuck behind the slower one, only for the slow guy to pull ahead?

And isn't it also a paradox that two different drivers could technically "win" the same imaginary race?

Doesn't the guy doing the passing look worse than the one being passed, just because he let himself get put in a position where he had to pass in the first place?

How many drivers ever overtook Amanda Kelly?

What's today's date—and why does anyone even care?

darkmarlin16 said:What kind of questions even are these? 🤣

So you're telling me it makes sense for everyone to just line up at the same time after a red flag, ignoring all the gaps and advantages built up during the race? Like, if Driver B is sitting twenty seconds behind Driver A, he could totally wreck Driver A's entire race by slamming into him, and honestly, twenty seconds is a massive gap to just ignore in this absolute circus.

It’s way more logical to just have them restart in their actual order, keeping those time gaps intact from when the race was halted, so we actually have a legitimate running order on the track.

There is absolutely no way the first option is more logical or fairer than the second.

.

ruggedhawk20 said:.

What exactly are you trying to get at here?
Are you implying he should've just kicked the bucket today or something?

George Ramos15 said:I’m not sure how old you are, but the reality is that F1 became a truly global phenomenon back in the 80s. Even if you've followed the sport since day one, you're essentially comparing a niche hobby enjoyed by a small group to the massive spectacle it is today. It's all pretty relative when you ask what "real" F1 actually looks like. Think about soccer—it started on some muddy fields in England, played by people far away from cameras, TV crews, or journalists. Basketball, tennis, volleyball—it's the same story for almost any sport. If you look at racing itself, even in its early days (around 1910, though it goes back further), it had a following and was quite popular compared to the early years of soccer. During the golden era of the 1930s, Grand Prix races could draw upwards of 300,000 spectators, which isn't exactly a "niche" crowd for that time. So, is the idea that this is just a "sport for weirdos" really accurate? As far as I know, many of the rules—which have shifted constantly since the beginning—involved bans, removals, and new regulations. At its core, F1 is just a set of organized rules designed to let engineers build the best possible car and hand it over to the best driver to see if they can take the win. That is the essence of F1: constant changes (even if I don't always love them) and new challenges for the most brilliant engineers and elite drivers on the planet. The car has always mattered; drivers alone never won championships. They could close a gap or make a difference, but they couldn't win without a competitive machine. There have always been plenty of talented drivers. The goal is for the competitors to adapt and thrive under new conditions. Sure, things like KERS or DRS might feel artificial, but back in the 80s, they had boost buttons and nobody complained. Rules change; sometimes only certain races counted toward the standings, sometimes fastest laps earned points, and at other times, there wasn't even a constructors' title. We've seen bans on all-wheel drive, six-wheelers, and ground effect—it's similar to recent technical changes or various types of assistance. That's the beauty of F1: the variety of rules, drivers, teams, winners, and champions. It's about constantly stepping into the unknown and, of course, racing. I don't think that old rule regarding letting cars through is really tied to modern complications, because the fact remains that F1 is much more complex today than it was in the 60s or 80s. When you look here, you realize that teams have always tried to level the playing field (going back to the 50s!) to make the competition more unpredictable and exciting, which leads to higher viewership and more overtaking. It just looks a lot less "natural" these days...

I was reading that and realized—man, this guy’s just another Disney fanatic. He tries hard to act like he isn't, but it’s pretty obvious.

Anyone trying to claim KERS and DRS are the same thing is totally dismissed in my book.

I haven't criticized KERS once in any of my posts—let alone lumped it in with DRS.

DRS is just a gimmick—KERS was actual innovation. DRS isn't even in the spirit of F1 (or a Grand Prix, if you want to be fancy)—but KERS definitely was.

darkmarlin16 said:What exactly are you trying to get at here?
Are you implying he should've just kicked the bucket today or something?

You should've spoken up when you were actually asked—but you didn't. Those are exactly the kind of questions I warned would expose the frauds in this group. Clearly, even twelve hours later, you're still clueless. Honestly, it's no surprise you couldn't wrap your head around how third place can be first.

graniteharbor502 said:I suppose you didn't quite grasp why everyone on the road seemed to be moving at such a snail's pace...
It wasn't that they were driving slowly, per se...

We shall hold you in our memories forever


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v62StJvxLu8

Do you even remember him?
You? Or anyone else on this board?

How many of his races did you actually watch?
You? Or anyone else here?

ruggedhawk20 said:I was reading that and realized—man, this guy’s just another Disney fanatic. He tries hard to act like he isn't, but it’s pretty obvious.

Anyone trying to claim KERS and DRS are the same thing is totally dismissed in my book.

I haven't criticized KERS once in any of my posts—let alone lumped it in with DRS.

DRS is just a gimmick—KERS was actual innovation. DRS isn't even in the spirit of F1 (or a Grand Prix, if you want to be fancy)—but KERS definitely was.

Hahaha, nice try... Kid. I never equated them. But what kind of logic is that? In a sport where a powerful internal combustion engine has always been the gold standard, you’re over here praising electricity and batteries. Enzo Ferrari is probably turning in his grave. You've clearly lost your way with all this lecturing and trying to play the smartest guy in the room. Maybe check your ego at the door before you read. Then you can get back to bashing someone when you haven't even bothered to actually read or listen to their point. Oh, wait—what about the boost button? You think that's not a gimmick too? Save that fancy philosophy for someone else. I'm not buying it.

Jason Campbell70 said:Do you even remember him?
You? Or anyone else on this board?

How many of his races did you actually watch?
You? Or anyone else here?

Amen

ruggedhawk20 said:You should've spoken up when you were actually asked—but you didn't. Those are exactly the kind of questions I warned would expose the frauds in this group. Clearly, even twelve hours later, you're still clueless. Honestly, it's no surprise you couldn't wrap your head around how third place can be first.

Well, you finally told him. Hopefully, he's feeling a bit better now. We'd all love to see that happen.

Ego🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

George Ramos15 said:Amen

Go ahead and say "amen" all you want—it doesn't change the fact that Jason Campbell70 is just throwing out red herrings to distract from how badly he and his little protégé darkmarlin16 have embarrassed themselves on this forum.

Someone asked a simple question about a specific date, and instead of answering, Jason Campbell70’s buddy here plays dumb and asks what they're even talking about. Then—get this—he claims he’s watched the documentary about the guy in the question maybe two or three times.

I gotta hand it to Jason Campbell70 for the sheer dedication and creativity he's using to try and scrub the stain off his buddy's reputation, but honestly? It's not working.

ruggedhawk20 said:Go ahead and say "amen" all you want—it doesn't change the fact that Jason Campbell70 is just throwing out red herrings to distract from how badly he and his little protégé darkmarlin16 have embarrassed themselves on this forum.

Someone asked a simple question about a specific date, and instead of answering, Jason Campbell70’s buddy here plays dumb and asks what they're even talking about. Then—get this—he claims he’s watched the documentary about the guy in the question maybe two or three times.

I gotta hand it to Jason Campbell70 for the sheer dedication and creativity he's using to try and scrub the stain off his buddy's reputation, but honestly? It's not working.

I’m calling foul because it’s honestly hilarious. We’re celebrating Jim Clark now, yet everyone was so incredibly critical of Ayrton Senna back then. Isn't it funny? That kind of hypocrisy is just ridiculous...🤷

ruggedhawk20 said:I was reading that and realized—man, this guy’s just another Disney fanatic. He tries hard to act like he isn't, but it’s pretty obvious.

Anyone trying to claim KERS and DRS are the same thing is totally dismissed in my book.

I haven't criticized KERS once in any of my posts—let alone lumped it in with DRS.

DRS is just a gimmick—KERS was actual innovation. DRS isn't even in the spirit of F1 (or a Grand Prix, if you want to be fancy)—but KERS definitely was.

Oh, give me a break. He’s a total Disney guy too. Honestly, I read your stuff and the second I spot that Disney obsession, I start questioning who I'm even talking to. To borrow a line from someone else: "Smart people just chuckle and move on to a different thread."

George Ramos15 said:I’m calling foul because it’s honestly hilarious. We’re celebrating Jim Clark now, yet everyone was so incredibly critical of Ayrton Senna back then. Isn't it funny? That kind of hypocrisy is just ridiculous...🤷

I'm literally just pointing out the hypocrisy here—it's not that deep.

ruggedhawk20 said:You’re just being dense because you don't get it—simple as that. You stared at the screen, saw the guy in third crossing first, and decided to come here and cry about it. Listen, thousands of people watching the race twenty years ago knew exactly why the leader was technically third—it was crystal clear—but since a few thousand people today are just as clueless as you, Bernie decided to play hero and simplify things for the masses, even if it meant screwing over the leader.

That’s exactly my point—F1 races used to be these niche little events that only a tiny handful of people actually cared about. For every fan watching, there were like a hundred others who didn't give a damn.

Look, I don't follow football—I have no clue who Arsenal is, how they ended up named after some coach, or what a corner even is... whatever. All I know is it’s basically 22 guys chasing one ball while only two wear gloves, and everyone else just wears cleats. Also, a 0-0 tie is mind-numbingly boring. So, if someone actually fixed the game for me—like, making the goals the full width of the field, killing off the offside rule, and getting rid of goalies entirely just to stop those zero-score snoozefests—what would a "real" fan think? Would they actually have a point if they told me to go jump in Lake Tahoe?

I’ve been obsessed with F1 since back when it was actually just a rulebook for building cars—not this circus we have now. Back before Google existed, before all the cheating, and before the constant drama—it actually made sense. If you started on pole, you won. Simple. You were the fastest in qualifying, so obviously, you were the fastest on race day—and if you're the fastest, nobody's passing you. It was common sense, period.

Then the Disney crowd showed up and decided the race was "boring." Those are the people who ruined my sport—I didn't change theirs, because honestly, I never even bothered to change their sport—since their version was boring to begin with, just like mine was to them from day one. Truth is, I never even noticed their sport existed, and I still don't.

It’s all just a mindset thing—honestly. If I don't like something, I just stop watching; if they don't like it, they go ahead and change it. Some people call that progress, others call it aggression—it’s a total gray area. Look, I’m not claiming I’m right, I’m just saying you and I aren't cut from the same cloth. You like one thing, I like another. You’ll probably call me a bully, and I might just call you some stuck-up, old-fashioned dinosaur whose time has passed. Maybe. Who knows?

Maybe my era is over—and yeah, it is. Was it better? Who knows. If F1 looked like this back then, I probably wouldn't have even noticed—actually, I’m pretty sure I wouldn't have given it a second thought.

I’m watching F1 today mostly because it reminds me of a sport I actually used to give a damn about—back when it was fun. One of my favorite things about following Formula 1 was being seen as a total weirdo for staring at cars driving in circles—and honestly? I loved that little bit of eccentricity. But nowadays, if you watch F1, you aren't some oddball anymore—you're just one of the masses—and that's where all the soul goes to die.

Then you get one of those days—totally polar opposite to how things used to be—where it actually hits you just how much the world has shifted. You’ve got two drivers, basically neck-and-neck in terms of talent and trophies, yet they trigger completely different vibes today. One guy practically breaks the internet, while the other is mostly just a niche topic for the die-hards.

and honestly, in the context of F1, they're basically the same guy

Two identical drivers—and they trigger two completely opposite reactions from these internet trolls today. It’s hilarious because neither side actually watched the damn thing. Not one person. One crowd is probably watching because their uncle told them to, and the other is trying to watch via their grandpa’s dial-up connection.

Look, I’ve got nothing against Senna—really—but I couldn't stand seeing Google basically make him the face of F1 back in March. It's just not right. Not for the sport, and definitely not for the other drivers. Sure, he’s easily top 20 all-time—right up there with Clark, Schumacher, and about seventeen others depending on who you ask—but he shouldn't be the guy synonymous with the entire series. He’s got some serious baggage, let's be real. That day? Total injustice.

dustycyclist19 said:Oh, give me a break. He’s a total Disney guy too. Honestly, I read your stuff and the second I spot that Disney obsession, I start questioning who I'm even talking to. To borrow a line from someone else: "Smart people just chuckle and move on to a different thread."

Just a stuck-up, rigid, arrogant, ego-driven narcissist who's obsessed with their own greatness.

Literally just a massive balloon.

ruggedhawk20 said:I'm literally just pointing out the hypocrisy here—it's not that deep.

Two identical drivers—and they trigger two completely opposite reactions from these internet trolls today. It’s hilarious because neither side actually watched the damn thing. Not one person. One crowd is probably watching because their uncle told them to, and the other is trying to watch via their grandpa’s dial-up connection.

Look, I’ve got nothing against Senna—really—but I couldn't stand seeing Google basically make him the face of F1 back in March. It's just not right. Not for the sport, and definitely not for the other drivers. Sure, he’s easily top 20 all-time—right up there with Clark, Schumacher, and about seventeen others depending on who you ask—but he shouldn't be the guy synonymous with the entire series. He’s got some serious baggage, let's be real. That day? Total injustice.

Finally, someone said it. Maybe Senna left behind an injustice to the very sport he elevated, even if the leadership treated him unfairly more times than I can count. But let's look at the reality: most experts—actual journalists and drivers—place Senna at number one, ahead of Clark, MS, or Prost. So, it's not quite the same thing. They were all legendary drivers and icons of the sport, but clearly, one stands slightly above the rest...

George Ramos15 said:Finally, someone said it. Maybe Senna left behind an injustice to the very sport he elevated, even if the leadership treated him unfairly more times than I can count. But let's look at the reality: most experts—actual journalists and drivers—place Senna at number one, ahead of Clark, MS, or Prost. So, it's not quite the same thing. They were all legendary drivers and icons of the sport, but clearly, one stands slightly above the rest...

Buddy, do you actually know how to read!?

March 21, 2014—Senna couldn't have pulled any "injustice" if he wanted to, because by March 2014, he'd long since run out of fingers to point with. Actually, as far as I know, he doesn't even have dried-up fingers left to work with.

On March 21, 2014, the real injustice was some Google algorithm deciding to dedicate the day to Senna—effectively turning him into the face of F1. He's the first and only driver to end up on a Google search homepage, which instantly made him synonymous with the sport in the minds of millions of casual fans who don't even follow racing.

ruggedhawk20 said:I'm literally just pointing out the hypocrisy here—it's not that deep.

Two identical drivers—and they trigger two completely opposite reactions from these internet trolls today. It’s hilarious because neither side actually watched the damn thing. Not one person. One crowd is probably watching because their uncle told them to, and the other is trying to watch via their grandpa’s dial-up connection.

Look, I’ve got nothing against Senna—really—but I couldn't stand seeing Google basically make him the face of F1 back in March. It's just not right. Not for the sport, and definitely not for the other drivers. Sure, he’s easily top 20 all-time—right up there with Clark, Schumacher, and about seventeen others depending on who you ask—but he shouldn't be the guy synonymous with the entire series. He’s got some serious baggage, let's be real. That day? Total injustice.

And honestly, that’s kind of why Senna became the icon for F1 in the first place.
Formula 1 was just way more mainstream during Senna's era compared to when Clark was running the show.😉

dustycyclist19 said:And honestly, that’s kind of why Senna became the icon for F1 in the first place.
Formula 1 was just way more mainstream during Senna's era compared to when Clark was running the show.😉

God forbid we even think about what the internet would look like if something tragic happened to Alonso at the next race—considering how much everyone obsesses over F1 and social media these days.

George Ramos15 said:Finally, someone said it. Maybe Senna left behind an injustice to the very sport he elevated, even if the leadership treated him unfairly more times than I can count. But let's look at the reality: most experts—actual journalists and drivers—place Senna at number one, ahead of Clark, MS, or Prost. So, it's not quite the same thing. They were all legendary drivers and icons of the sport, but clearly, one stands slightly above the rest...

......☕
It’s probably just a vision issue on your end, but I’m happy to help clarify. Don't mention it; I'm here if you need anything else. I explicitly mentioned he isn't around anymore (as you can clearly see...), yet his legacy is immortal, and he can still "right wrongs"... if that’s even the right way to put it.

ruggedhawk20 said:Buddy, do you actually know how to read!?

March 21, 2014—Senna couldn't have pulled any "injustice" if he wanted to, because by March 2014, he'd long since run out of fingers to point with. Actually, as far as I know, he doesn't even have dried-up fingers left to work with.

On March 21, 2014, the real injustice was some Google algorithm deciding to dedicate the day to Senna—effectively turning him into the face of F1. He's the first and only driver to end up on a Google search homepage, which instantly made him synonymous with the sport in the minds of millions of casual fans who don't even follow racing.

Why does that bother you so much? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If Google shapes someone's view, shouldn't those of us who actually know F1 just ignore it? You should just laugh it off. Instead, you're trying to fight "heretics" simply because they think differently—whether they got that view from a Google search or from years of watching races. Just take a breath and try to look at the bigger picture.😉

Look, we aren't even talking about each other—period. We’re dissecting the gap between old-school fans and the new crowd—specifically how Google skews a modern fan's perspective. It's about why today's fans can't wrap their heads around a race from twenty years ago—and how that total lack of understanding actually messed up modern F1. Basically, we're comparing what F1 used to be versus what it is now. And yet, somehow, you managed to turn the thread title "F1 Then vs. Now" into something else entirely.

But hey, since you all claim to just skim through threads "at lightning speed," I guess it's no shocker that you misread everything and jumped to the wrong conclusions.

One more thing—forum threads are a free-for-all. A topic isn't going to look exactly how you pictured it in your head—mostly because it's built by a bunch of different people. This isn't some personal blog where one guy dictates the entire narrative.

Honestly, though? The biggest issue here is everyone reading way too fast.