rec.autos.simulators

by **Ian** » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 05:07:17

I fell asleep during my last N4 league race !! ;)

--

Ian P
<email invalid due to spam>

by **Mario Petrinovi** » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 05:13:26

Whereever there are tires, there is tire saving driving.
Todays F1 races are won or lost on tires. You didn't see
that driver who manage to stay 1-2 laps longer on fuel win
races because of less ammount of fuel and better tires. Is
this not a strategy, lol. It is tires war currently going on.
What kind of argument this is. Are you all blind.

by **Andre Warring** » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 11:58:44

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:13:26 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"

> Whereever there are tires, there is tire saving driving.
>Todays F1 races are won or lost on tires. You didn't see
>that driver who manage to stay 1-2 laps longer on fuel win
>races because of less ammount of fuel and better tires. Is
>this not a strategy, lol. It is tires war currently going on.
>What kind of argument this is. Are you all blind.

if you visit this newsgroup once in a while you might know that I
kinda like GPL, a racing sim based on the '67 season.. where tires
were not half as important as in nowadays Nascar.
Besides that I think there is still a major difference in stragegie
between Nascar and current F1 races but I'm a bit too tired to discuss
that right now.

HAPPY NEWYEAR

Andre

>> Yup, I think this is exactly how it is.. and also the reason why I
>> can't get into Nascar.. I like driving on the limit all the time, in
>> Nascar the major thing that counts is saving your tires and keeping up
>> with the pack, with the outcome being decided on the last couple of
>> laps.. That alone would be boring enough for me, but throw in the
>> average 30% yellow laps in an average online race and I think that
>> explains why I simply don't like Nascar. I tried it more than enough,
>> I see how good the sim is, but I just find it plain boring :)

by **Mario Petrinovi** » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:56:42

Thanks anyway for replying me. Because, I feel so
isolated in this NG, and am always getting some strange
answers, wich I don't understend.
We were basicaly talked about difference between
American and European look at racing. The major thesis of
Europeans is, something like, "I don't like strategy, I like
real racing.".
Well, simply, I don't understand it. Because, 1) there is
strategy in F1 ((just ) a little different, but, neverthelles, strongly
present ), and 2) man, if you want real racing, Americans still
do it much better (CART ).
I simply cannot understand how a racing fan can put so
much in F1, where, 1) during TV coverage, you see most of
the time leader driving alone, sometimes you see some battle up
to the first six, the rest like don't exist. 2) where the drivers who
are really racing hard are the one at the back, because , with
bad equipment they try to be in pace with drivers with good
equipment, and 3) all atention is on a guy with the best equipment,
driving comfortably all alone at the lead.
4) where most famous track is the one on whitch, by design,
racing can happen only by accident.
5) where there is a little bit, or no at all, overtaking. At the
same time, racing form with a lot of overtaking, is incredibly
dull to F1 fan.
To make all things more interesting, it is actually me who
have been watching F1 races from 1973, and who was all the time
F1 fan, till I didn't have a chance to watch American races via
satelite.

Happy New Year

> On Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:13:26 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"

> > Whereever there are tires, there is tire saving driving.
> >Todays F1 races are won or lost on tires. You didn't see
> >that driver who manage to stay 1-2 laps longer on fuel win
> >races because of less ammount of fuel and better tires. Is
> >this not a strategy, lol. It is tires war currently going on.
> >What kind of argument this is. Are you all blind.

> if you visit this newsgroup once in a while you might know that I
> kinda like GPL, a racing sim based on the '67 season.. where tires
> were not half as important as in nowadays Nascar.
> Besides that I think there is still a major difference in stragegie
> between Nascar and current F1 races but I'm a bit too tired to discuss
> that right now.

> HAPPY NEWYEAR

> Andre

by **Joachim Trens** » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 21:20:08

Hi Tom,

a good post.

Achim

[snip: see first post in this thread]

by **Andre Warring** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 00:31:11

On Tue, 1 Jan 2002 11:56:42 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"

> To make all things more interesting, it is actually me who
>have been watching F1 races from 1973, and who was all the time
>F1 fan, till I didn't have a chance to watch American races via
>satelite.

I can't really judge Nascar, simply because I don't know much about
it. I only know a couple of the drivers and nothing about the history
of Nascar.
With F1 it's otherwise, I read a lot about F1 and it's simply more fun
watching a racing series if you know all the drivers, the cars and a
bit of the history.

You are right when you talk about current F1 racing, if you watch it
purely for the racing it can be pretty boring most of the times.. only
a couple of drivers who can win thanks to their much better cars, and
most races are won on the pitstop strategy. But I love the F1 cars,
the F1 drivers and the F1 tracks, again because I know them all so
well.. like one other guy said, watching one F1 car racing on a track
is exciting in itself, and it gets even better when that car is being
followed by 20 other cars :)

Andre

by **John Pancoas** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 01:30:21

I really, really enjoy F1, have for years, but boy, you hit my biggest
gripe in terms of tv coverage; all that's ever shown is the first 2-3 cars
for the whole race.
Show the entire field, throughout the race.

-John

> Thanks anyway for replying me. Because, I feel so
> isolated in this NG, and am always getting some strange
> answers, wich I don't understend.
> We were basicaly talked about difference between
> American and European look at racing. The major thesis of
> Europeans is, something like, "I don't like strategy, I like
> real racing.".
> Well, simply, I don't understand it. Because, 1) there is
> strategy in F1 ((just ) a little different, but, neverthelles, strongly
> present ), and 2) man, if you want real racing, Americans still
> do it much better (CART ).
> I simply cannot understand how a racing fan can put so
> much in F1, where, 1) during TV coverage, you see most of
> the time leader driving alone, sometimes you see some battle up
> to the first six, the rest like don't exist. 2) where the drivers who
> are really racing hard are the one at the back, because , with
> bad equipment they try to be in pace with drivers with good
> equipment, and 3) all atention is on a guy with the best equipment,
> driving comfortably all alone at the lead.
> 4) where most famous track is the one on whitch, by design,
> racing can happen only by accident.
> 5) where there is a little bit, or no at all, overtaking. At the
> same time, racing form with a lot of overtaking, is incredibly
> dull to F1 fan.
> To make all things more interesting, it is actually me who
> have been watching F1 races from 1973, and who was all the time
> F1 fan, till I didn't have a chance to watch American races via
> satelite.

> Happy New Year

> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:13:26 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"

> > > Whereever there are tires, there is tire saving driving.
> > >Todays F1 races are won or lost on tires. You didn't see
> > >that driver who manage to stay 1-2 laps longer on fuel win
> > >races because of less ammount of fuel and better tires. Is
> > >this not a strategy, lol. It is tires war currently going on.
> > >What kind of argument this is. Are you all blind.

> > if you visit this newsgroup once in a while you might know that I
> > kinda like GPL, a racing sim based on the '67 season.. where tires
> > were not half as important as in nowadays Nascar.
> > Besides that I think there is still a major difference in stragegie
> > between Nascar and current F1 races but I'm a bit too tired to discuss
> > that right now.

> > HAPPY NEWYEAR

> > Andre

by **Mario Petrinovi** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 04:37:42

Thanks you John and Andre for yours honest answers. You two
are helping me to express myself better. I want to say, I also love
watching F1 (also other forms of racing ), and know it for a long long time.
I want to say that todeys F1 is made for masses, not quite for a
racing fan. They are showing first 2-3 cars, simply because masses
doesn't know other drivers, and don't have time to learn. Female masses
like to watch soap series "Di***", where everybody is extremly rich.
F1 is soap for male masses. You put big amount of money in anything,
and you'll get few hundrets times more money from people who like to
watch that big money.
Masses also love heroes, so you create them a hero. Senna has
incredibly low records. He failed to transfer 24 poles into a win, my god,
altough he was always in a fastest car (Schumacher have 10 wins more
than poles, and he never was in fastest car ), he had only 19 fastest laps
in 161 races (Schumacher 44 in 160 races ). Is this "the fastest man the
world has ever seen". I mean, in F1 everything is upside-down. And jet
a lot of people compare it to nothing.
Other form of road racing (BTCC, CART, DTM ), while probably
more interesting, doesn't have such a big audience, simply because there
is not so much money involved. This is why I don't understand how
somebody can say for Americans that all they have is show, when
actualy Europeans are organizing F1 show, and Americans have some
pure racing, like CART (old F1 stile ) and, if you ask me, NASCAR .

by **John Pancoas** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 04:54:32

Well, without being quite as adamant about it as you are,<G>, that's true.
At the same time, I think it's safe to say it's true about any of the top
levels of racing, not just F1; it's more about entertainment(from the
sactioning bodies, not necessarily the drivers view) than racing per se.
Same can be said for any professional sport to some degree.

As I said elsewhere; glad there's local tracks<G>

-John

> Thanks you John and Andre for yours honest answers. You two
> are helping me to express myself better. I want to say, I also love
> watching F1 (also other forms of racing ), and know it for a long long
time.
> I want to say that todeys F1 is made for masses, not quite for a
> racing fan. They are showing first 2-3 cars, simply because masses
> doesn't know other drivers, and don't have time to learn. Female masses
> like to watch soap series "Di***", where everybody is extremly rich.
> F1 is soap for male masses. You put big amount of money in anything,
> and you'll get few hundrets times more money from people who like to
> watch that big money.
> Masses also love heroes, so you create them a hero. Senna has
> incredibly low records. He failed to transfer 24 poles into a win, my god,
> altough he was always in a fastest car (Schumacher have 10 wins more
> than poles, and he never was in fastest car ), he had only 19 fastest laps
> in 161 races (Schumacher 44 in 160 races ). Is this "the fastest man the
> world has ever seen". I mean, in F1 everything is upside-down. And jet
> a lot of people compare it to nothing.
> Other form of road racing (BTCC, CART, DTM ), while probably
> more interesting, doesn't have such a big audience, simply because there
> is not so much money involved. This is why I don't understand how
> somebody can say for Americans that all they have is show, when
> actualy Europeans are organizing F1 show, and Americans have some
> pure racing, like CART (old F1 stile ) and, if you ask me, NASCAR .

> > I really, really enjoy F1, have for years, but boy, you hit my biggest
> > gripe in terms of tv coverage; all that's ever shown is the first 2-3
cars
> > for the whole race.
> > Show the entire field, throughout the race.

> > -John

by **Mario Petrinovi** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 04:54:41

BTW, this is another misconception about NASCAR, I'm
afraid. If all they do is saving tires and keeping up with pack, than
it wouldn't be posible to have 2/3 of the field lap or more behind the
leader, at the end. They are really racing, all the time.

by **David G Fishe** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 05:20:08

I didn't know that about Senna. Another reason why I think Schumacher is the
best ever. :-)

David G Fisher (NASCAR blows ;-) )

by **Dave Henri** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:03:04

"David G Fisher"

Ahhh but Senna raced against Alain Prost...Schumy had...what for
competition???

by **jlohma** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:12:49

Well, whats to slam? Other than the fact that the races are quite boring to
watch most of the time. They can't slam the drivers, F1 drivers are the best
in the world. The tracks are the most legandary tracks in the world. The
cars are the most advanced cars in the world.

by **jlohma** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:19:21

Great racing? Beating, banging and spinouts is great racing? Huh? Depends on
if you want to watch great drivers (who rarely make mistakes), or rednecks
who that are so bad, they have fill in drivers for the road courses in there
own series.

by **Dave Henri** » Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:54:33

"jlohman"
I'm a racing fan...not a Nascar fan, not an F1 fan, but a racing fan..Heck
I even watch an occasional IRL event.(oops mini-slam) But I do have
preferences...I'll generally watch open wheel races first, But touring car,
Trans Am, Desert, Hydroplanes...even lawnmowers have caught my eye... Thes
absolute best race I saw last year was the AMA SUperbike race at
Brainerd(and yes I remember what DGF said about that :> ). So let me play
the Devil's advocate for a moment or two...

Ever watch Rallye drivers? I don't hear of too many Rallye drivers
comming up from kiddie go-karts.( ;> ) Winston Cup drivers don't need a
computer controlling the engine during pit stops...they hit the pitspeed
limits WITHOUT a rev-limiter. Touring car drivers don't need a computer to
get them going from a standing start like F1 drivers. Just what makes them
the best?

Is that why most have been butchered so that they barely resemble the
Legendary tracks they 'USED' to be? Tell me the current incarnation of
Imola is 'legendary.' Is Hungary a better track than Mid Ohio? or Phillip
Island? Is Silverstone better than Brands Hatch?

Yup they sure are...gotta have a computer program to get them
moving...most of the time that is. They gotta have another program to keep
the tires from spinning.
But two outta three ain't bad...
Beleive me I watch more F1 than Nascar, but each has it's appeal. The
list of things WRONG with F1 is probably much longer than that for Nascar.
But both, in fact all racing series, have shortcomings that could be
improved to provide a better racing product for us the fans.
dave henrie

rec.autos.simulators

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"