Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari, Yas Marina, 2017

Dull Abu Dhabi GP “not what we want” – Carey

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Formula One CEO Chase Carey says Formula One wants better races than last month’s season finale in Abu Dhabi

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Jolyon Palmer is propping up this year’s F1 Driver Rankings and it’s hard to see him making a return. Ivan offers a few kind words:

It’s never a good feeling to give it your all and see your team mate so far up the timing screens, and surely the situation became even more difficult with the media and fans making him fully aware of his lack of performance. Such a shame, as he seemed to be a pretty nice guy but this is F1, and world class talent is what matters in the end.
Ivan (@wpinrui)

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Stretch and Matiascasali!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 51 comments on “Dull Abu Dhabi GP “not what we want” – Carey”

    1. Would be nice if Kubica was announced as the Williams driver on his birthday. Also that cartoon by Team Mates is brilliant and perfectly describes my opinion!

      1. Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
        7th December 2017, 7:08

        I’m willing it to happen everyday, a full pre-season on the new tyres and a few full race weekends and I think he would be back to his old self in no time. The only big concern is imagine how uncomfortable it would be to see Kubica involved in a big shunt, especially one of those where the driver holds onto the steering wheel on impact. He would lose that arm completely.

    2. Hey! Today is my birthday too! So williams better give me a nice present and announce Kubica as their driver

      1. or give Kubica a nice present and announce you as their driver ;) surprise!!

        1. Haha brilliant!!!

    3. Perez likes the halo? I don’t think I like Perez anymore. 😂

    4. Sundar Srinivas Harish
      7th December 2017, 0:27

      World Touring Car Championship axed, replaced with WTCR

      The FIA should try to learn from NASCAR and IMSA. The former’s current knee-jerk reactions will only hurt the viewership of incumbent series.

      NASCAR has perfected the art of conducting and marketing stock (touring) car racing. NASCAR has tided over at least a couple of crises over 4-5 decades, like the “aero wars” and the “stock cars which did not look like stock cars” era, and IMSA has literally resurrected the American prototype and GT racing scene, and pushed attendance number and viewership far above what the ALMS ever had. Meanwhile, LMP1, which was supposed to be the cutting edge of road car technology, has only 1 manufacturer team amid a bunch of privateers like ByKolles (who pulled out of the ’17 season after the first couple of races), and WTCC is being folded yet again in favour of new touring car regulations.

    5. Abu Dhabi puts on a great show and a great event. But the race in Abu Dhabi was not what we want in the sport today.

      Epitome of all that is wrong with F1 today.
      For most of the people, race IS the show and race the event itself is not much more than a backdrop for the show to happen in front of. I don’t know where was that great show if the race wasn’t good, because race IS the show.

      I’ll again use the cable provider analogy. It’s like, when they can’t provide you with enough of quality programming that you like, instead of lowering the price, they insist on cramming your package with 90% of the stuff you don’t care about and will never watch, and then they argue that it’s a great value for that price.

      F1 is charging extortionate fees to race organizers, who in turn have to charge extortionate prices for tickets, and then people at the track wonder where is the value they’re supposed to get for that price. Well, because F1 keeps coming up with bad rules and unequal revenue distribution, they can’t put on a good show, and therefor can’t provide the expected value.
      So, in turn, track organizers are left with trying to come up with irrelevant bling, to increase the “value”, and this “show” keeps getting applause from FOM, because it keeps the heat off their back a bit by providing SOME show, in the absence of THE show.

      1. This. The cable analogy is perfect.

        I don’t really agree about the how they can’t put a good show for value. I think it’s just natural that car lovers is died out these days thus the much lesser pool of people in the world that cared about F1 or racing in first place, let alone successful enough to be able to afford attending to a race. 80’s and 90’s is the era when it’s common to see a kid put Ferrari or Lamborghini poster is their bedroom. Nowadays, even if the ticket cost only $10, I bet most young people won’t care and play with their phones instead. Silverstone and Nurburgring dire circumstances is a highlight than even in the country where motor racing began, it also died out.

        The irrelevant show is just an attempt from the organizers to attract crowd that doesn’t care about F1 or racing in first place. Singapore and Abu Dhabi try to sell it as prestige event to the wealthy, COTA with concert as a mean to attract teenagers. Do I enjoy the “event”? No. But I understand why they did it.

        1. 80’s and 90’s is the era when it’s common to see a kid put Ferrari or Lamborghini poster is their bedroom.

          Haha, had a few of both. :)
          Was just always missing some Senna in McLaren Honda poster. Had to settle for Senna in the Williams, since I started watching F1 in the early 90s, and by the time I wanted to get a Senna poster, Williams version is all they had. :)

        1. And again though, I don’t understand the impatience here. Why isn’t Liberty being allowed some time, by some around here, to consciously and deliberately mould F1 as they have talked about doing? They’ve said all the right things, and they didn’t make F1 what it is today, they have to deal with it for now. Contracts are in place that they can’t just break, for example.

          And they aren’t trying to improve the show the venue promoters put on, to distract from what is sometimes not the greatest show in the track. They want it all improved. And to do that right is going to take some time to evaluate what is good in F1 and what should be changed. In due time.

          From a business standpoint, if I’m Liberty my go-to philosophy would be to try to retain revenues but improve the value of the product for the money the fans spend. Both win that way. Reducing revenues is not generally what companies strive to do. So in terms of the cable company analogy, sure maybe they can try to get away with charging more for less, and one result is that many people have dropped their cable/satellite packages and just stream everything. I get no vibe from Liberty and Brawn whatsoever that that is what they want to do. I don’t hear Carey saying the race was great and didn’t we just give you great value for the price. He’s acknowledging that race was NOT great value for the price. Everything they project is about long term growth of the product and the audience. They have all the potential in the world to do that, while cable and satellite companies seem to be chasing the horses that have already left the barn.

          1. Just to add to my last sentence, in a lot of ways so is Liberty chasing horses that have left the barn, but at least they have a lot of room to improve everything and grow the audience back. Cable companies solution was to free up packages so you could pick and choose your channels more than be forced into set groups of channels many of which you don’t want, however, in order to maintain revenues, by the time you pay individually for the channels you do want you’re pretty much back up to what you were spending to get all you wanted anyway. Smoke and mirrors. It is far far too early to claim smoke and mirrors of Liberty…they’ve only just begun.

    6. and surely the situation became even more difficult with the media and fans making him fully aware of his lack of performance

      Actually the British media was surprisingly kind on him until it was obvious he was sacked.

    7. Curious about the Carey quote:

      “Abu Dhabi puts on a great show and a great event. But the race in Abu Dhabi was not what we want in the sport today.”

      And yet…Yas Marina is on the calendar for 2018. And 2018 cars will be even heavier due to the heavenly halo. And with a 3 engine limit for the season, does improving the sport imply everyone will be starting from the back of the grid or pitlane? Or will they spice up the racing by keeping it a late afternoon/twilight race, but keep the track lights off – and at the pitstop drivers switch to a night vision helmet?

    8. Liberty don’t write the sporting regulations (the FIA do), and the 3-engine limit for 2018 was agreed by all manufacturers before it was written into the regulations, so they can’t be blamed for it.

      The same applies to contracts with circuits; they can’t just be kicked off the calendar overnight.

      Deapite that, I feel that F1 has already changed for the better in 2017 more so than it has done in the previous 5-10 years, yet Liberty’s vision for F1 is long term and we should trust in them as so far they’ve shown a very professional and thorough approach. Don’t expect drastic changes until then or you’ll be disappointed.

    9. Actually, Lewis, there is a very simple reason why F2/GP2 has better racing than F1. It’s the same-make cars. If you want F1 to be one spec, and allow such close racing, fine. But then your Mercedes would not be the class of the field and you wouldn’t be four time WC.
      Honestly, you have to love these suggestions. Spec racing series have very simple but relatively effective aerodynamics. That is what makes it so easy. Teams can’t fiddle with winglets and diffusers till kingdom come like in F1. But who would accept F1 as spec series? Doubtful.

      1. @hahostolze From reading the linked article on Motorsport Hamilton is specifically talking about cars not being able to follow closely. We only have to wind back to pre-2010 cars to see how closely F1 could follow in the past with the smaller front wings. I often catch the race re-runs on Sky F1 in the UK and it’s a reminder of what racing used to be like prior to DRS and the ridiculous front wings we have today, drivers were able to follow at sub 1 sec gaps lap after lap and had to work for each over-take without ‘push to pass’.

        1. @ju88sy Yeah, but at that time the in-race refuelling had a very significant detrimental effect on on-track overtaking even if the pre-2010 cars (I doubt it) were more following-friendly than today’s ones.

          1. Michael Brown (@)
            7th December 2017, 21:11

            @jerejj 2009 cars had much simpler front wings than later years.

        2. @ju88sy But they were not able to follow within 1 second of each other with the pre-2009 cars with the smaller front wings….. In fact the main reason the front wings were made wider in 2009 (Along with rear wings narrower) was to try & get the main elements out of the worst of the turbulent air to try & allow cars to get within 1 second of each other.

          As somebody thats been watching F1 for nearly 29 years, The difficulties in following/getting close to another car & the complaints about it from fans & drivers is no worse now than it was when I started watching in 1989. Heck you can go back to the 70’s/80’s & hear similar complaints from drivers.

          People, Often look back & see snippets of racing from the past & believe those snippets show what things were like at the time. People see Senna/Mansell side by side, wheel to wheel at Barcelona in 1991 or the Gilles Villeneuve/Rene Arnoux scrap for 2nd at Dijon in 1979 & they think that this is the racing we saw all the time….. It wasn’t. Those moments stand out & are remembers in part because they were moments of excitement in otherwise less eventful races.

          I often think how interesting it would be if we were able to do something like archive Full Race/Full season watch along’s with some sort of ‘rate the race’ poll like we have for modern races. I think races from the past would rate lower than a lot of people would think based on what they think races from the past were like or how they think they remember them.

          1. @stefmeister I appreciate this as a long time F1 Fan – however the post 2010 changes have resulted in the blind alley of large wings and DRS and made a bad situation worse. But I have watched plenty of historical races from pre-2010 where the following was closer (not necessarily resulting in an over take though). I concede that the only quantitative way to asses this would be to wade through the data-set of race average driver timing splits for say the Top 6-10 drivers.

            Looking specifically at over-takes, we can’t correct-out DRS enabled over-takes to compare with previous non-DRS over takes years as car positioning for DRS is an integral part of racing these days.

          2. @stefmeister That would indeed be interesting. Whether or not the racing was just as processional in the past, I think we at least had much more of a sense that we were watching gladiators duking it out on track which fortunately Brawn has spoken on.

      2. But who would accept F1 as spec series?

        If F1 as a spec series could show me the same level of racing action and excitement as F2 and GP3 at Yas Marina, I’d accept it with open arms.
        F1 is so tied down with technical regulations and restrictive rules that there is little scope for legal innovation. So why waste billions on marginal development? Better to have an accessible spec series that actually presents a full grid to the fans. Seems to work for IndyCar.

        1. you mentioned 3 spec series that, according to you work (F2, GP3 and IndyCar), why would need a fourth one of the same thing? You already have what you are asking for in the other three.

          1. You’re right. Let’s scrap F1 and just have the other three.

        2. If F1 as a spec series could show me the same level of racing action and excitement as F2 and GP3 at Yas Marina, I’d accept it with open arms.

          That’s fine for you, but I wouldn’t.

          As I have said so many times on here, F1 is not just about racing for me (and many others). I love reading about all the new developments, from engine to suspension to aero. Without these, I would soon lose interest.

          When it comes to better on-track action, a spec race is better to watch. But when all the other parts of F1 are taken into account, they don’t come close!

          However, there are ways to get a good compromise. With different aero* and more equal distribution of funds, we could have a series with lots of development but good racing, too.

          * When it comes to aero, I’m going to repeat my earlier suggestion. F1 has some of the smartest aerodynamic engineers involved. So let’s force them to make cars easier to follow. Structure the regulations so that being able to closely gives a great advantage. My own idea is to replace qualifying with a reverse championship order sprint race. In order to gain a high grid position, your car must be able to overtake. Therefore the engineers from the top teams have to design their cars to be able to follow closely, or else they can not win.

          1. Understand, @drmouse. But don’t you agree that the FIA are so intent on ‘equalising’ the cars that they are banning almost all areas of innovation? Gone are the days when we had some turbo’s, some not, some with giant airboxes, some with ‘tea tray’ front wings. The regulations have tied the designers hands so tightly that F1 might as well be a spec series for all the new developments it allows. So let’s make it simple and try F1 as a spec series.

      3. It’s the same-make cars. If you want F1 to be one spec, and allow such close racing, fine. But then your Mercedes would not be the class of the field and you wouldn’t be four time WC.

        @hahastolze except when he was in spec series he won every championship on his first attempt so who do you think would defeat him in F1 if it were the same? Seb Vettel? Who was beaten to the 2006 F3 Euroseries 2006 by his teammate Paul Di Resta?

        I hazard if F1 was a spec series and Lewis had been racing in it for 11 years then he in all likelihood would have beaten Schumacher’s 7 titles by now. So try again.

        He’s making a point that the fans are crying out for, louder cars and closer racing that’s it but people like you need to nitpick and fantasise just because it’s Lewis.

        1. Your last sentence makes no sense, not sure I have ever shown a bias against Hamilton nor a desire to nitpick only when it’s him. Hamilton just talks a lot of nonsense sometimes and I like to pull him up on it. If this were any other driver my remark would be the same.

          And on spec series, no? He won neither Formula Renault nor Formula Three on his first attempt. Your facts are wrong. That is nitpicking.

        2. Your last sentence makes no sense, not sure I have ever shown a bias against Hamilton nor a desire to nitpick only when it’s him. Hamilton just talks a lot of nonsense sometimes and I like to pull him up on it. If this were any other driver my remark would be the same.

          And on spec series, no? He won neither Formula Renault nor Formula Three on his first attempt. Your facts are wrong. That is nitpicking.

      4. Yes he’d probably have 6.

        Im not sure what spec racing has to do with following another car in dirty air.

        Honestly you have to love these commenters.

      5. Doesn’t need to be 100% spec series. Only 4 manufacture teams with 5 cars each will bunch the field up.

    10. On Max Verstappen being the third biggest earner in F1: from the forum driver rankings, and the F1 writers driver rankings, etc, you get the idea that at least for 2017 there was a top three of drivers, albeit the order differs. Hamilton, Vettel, Verstappen. Those three then also being the best paid drivers is actually a fair result, and makes sense. Better than the days where Toyota paid a massive wage regardless of talent (cough, Ralf).

      1. Ralf was very good at Williams and beat Montoya all the time. Probably why he got paid so well at Toyota before he went to DTM

      2. Yes. This! Teams know full well who the best drivers are and tend to pay them most. They are “worth” it.

        I am sure Hamilton would not be worth 40 million to say Force India.

        But with Mercedes, he essentially snatched WDC from Vettel and Ferrari. A championship is worth 40 million in advertising. Bottas wouldn’t be able to do that, well not this year.

        No way Mercedes would get 5 tenths by spending additional say 35 million on development and snatching a mid level driver. If they could get that kind of speed they would spend that money.

        1. Exactly. It always makes me chuckle when “fans” debate which drivers are good & which aren’t. The fact is that at the top (Vettel, Alonso, Hamilton, Verstappen, Ricciardo… not necessarily in that order) there really isn’t that much between them, & all the team bosses know exactly which drivers constitute the cream of the crop. That’s why the same handful of drivers are never left wanting a drive with a top team & why they get paid the biggest bucks to drive the best cars.
          As far as team members go, the engineers tend to have their finger on the pulse of who’s quickest first because they’re the first ones in the garage poring over the data. They know exactly who’s quick & exactly where they’re quick, as well as whether or not they’ll likely be any quicker. Over the years, I’ve come to treat mechanic’s opinions on driver talent as gospel… been a perfect barometer thus far. Of course the drivers all have their individual strengths (Hamilton’s one lap pace, Alonso’s adaptability, etc) and certain circuits suit some driving styles more than others, but in terms of talent there’s no proverbial gulf between any of those five. Personally I think Lewis & Max are the very pointy bit, but Seb, Dan & Alonso are still very much tip of the sword as well.

    11. I am still optimistic that teams will create a halo design that will actually not look that bad!

    12. I think what some people are missing when considering the quality of racing that F1 delivers is that the stalemate that drivers often reach when fighting is indicative of the quality of driving.

      F2 drivers and other lower categories throwing their cars past each other doesn’t mean the racing is better. That passing in F1 is hard makes passes special. Hamilton Vs Vettel at Spa where Vettel didn’t pull it off, or Hamilton Vs Alonso in Mexico are part of what makes F1 the best racing to watch despite the action being a little arid at times.

      Some tracks are clearly flawed and just don’t permit overtaking. The solution isn’t gimmicks like DRS, chewing gum tyres, or not being able to give the driver information over the radio. The solution is to change corner profiles, take the data from tracks where overtaking happens, improve the tracks where it doesn’t. God knows they have enough run off area to tweak them.

      1. Very much this. Another issue with F2 as an example is that it has very specific tyre rules. Hamilton may think the races are exciting but rarely if never do you see them have race long battles. Often the tyres need to drop off (and they do) for the racing to be close, and then someone can get closer and maybe overtake and then their tyres drop off etc. F2 is almost random to a point where it doesn’t deliver the best drivers at times.

      2. @philipgb I agree, I reflect on Spa as the most enthralling race of the year due to the cat and mouse nature of the Vettel pursuit occurring over the duration of the race. I think in the current F1 regulations we are at one extreme at the moment with regards to aerodynamic issues inhibiting closer chasing.

    13. Please someone show the people in charge of F1 this video:
      Ozzy Man Reviews: Marble Race With Obstacles

      Nice track, close calls, manouvering, photo finish… it has all.

      1. Thanks for that Mustavo – most enjoyable. Proves also that I will watch anything race in the off season.

        Waste a few minutes and watch this folks – really worth it.

    14. On a more serious note: can a car nose get stuck onto the halo?

      1. Ask Kubica

    15. Michael Brown (@)
      7th December 2017, 21:13

      Abu Dhabi puts on a great show and a great event. But the race in Abu Dhabi was not what we want in the sport today.

      Translation: The race is boring but it looks pretty.

    16. Regarding COTD @wpinrui
      Sadly in F1 today world class talent is not always what matters in the end, think Maldonado, Stroll, Ericsson, Chilton, etc etc…. Money talks! And if Palmer was driving for the likes of Sauber or Manor his seat would’ve been much more secure.
      Palmer’s biggest problem this year wasn’t so much Hulk’s relative pace but the fact that the Renault works team and their financial might no longer needed a driver with $$$ value and instead one capable of taking the fight to the bigger teams

    Comments are closed.