F1 still seeing “solid growth” in American TV viewership in 2023

35 comments on “F1 still seeing “solid growth” in American TV viewership in 2023”

1. 

   Andrew (@andrewsf1)
   13th August 2023, 4:17

   @keithcollantine
   An idea for the “F1 calendar” page:
   The list of race dates would be easier to read (in my opinion) if there was a blank row in between non-consecutive races (while double/triple headers would be grouped together as they are currently) and the date cell on the blank row would say “2/3/4 week gap”. For example on the “2024 F1 calendar” page it could say:
   Round Race Circuit Date Forum
   14 Belgian Grand Prix Spa-Francorchamps Jul 26-28 Forum
   4 week gap
   15 Dutch Grand Prix Zandvoort Aug 23-25 Forum

   That way it would be very easy to see which are double/triple headers and which are stand-alone races. Personally that would save me at least 1 minute of time at least 3-4 times a year when I’m looking which races are happening in the next couple of months and when. (and if a race is on a Saturday then 13 or 15 days would still count as 2 weeks)
2. 

   Jere (@jerejj)
   13th August 2023, 5:47

   I wonder what made Rahal see the need to mention something no one probably asked him about + claim something false about that.

   Regarding the tweet about Mercedes car collection: W11 in Suzuka.
   1. 

      S
      13th August 2023, 6:53

      I wonder what made Rahal see the need to mention something no one probably asked him about + claim something false about that.

      Rahal clearly watches F1, and the rather poor approach to racing it takes.
      No doubt he was asked about the race/racing he’d just been participating in and how he felt about it. He just voluntarily added that if Indycar used the same system as another comparable racing series (F1), it would be a massive negative for their series – just as it is in F1.

      What was false?
   2. 

      notagrumpyfan
      13th August 2023, 8:43

      I wonder what made Rahal see the need to mention something no one probably asked him about + claim something false about that.

      I wonder exactly the same about your statement; nobody asked you and it’s most likely incorrect :p
   3. 

      HAL
      13th August 2023, 8:49

      Rahal is quite used to make sour comparison with F1. 2nd grade driver in a secondary series (business wise, I love indycar) ; he’s just jealous.
   4. 

      MichaelN
      13th August 2023, 11:29

      He is a race car driver. F1 is the biggest racing series in the world. It uses DRS to ‘assist’ overtaking (or so it claims). Rahal doesn’t like DRS and feels, as do many, that it detracts from the battles that make racing exciting and enjoyable.

      Why would he need to be specifically asked about it? And what is false about it?

      Verstappen won the last F1 race after starting halfway down the grid. Does anyone remember any of the overtakes he made?
      1. 

         Jere (@jerejj)
         13th August 2023, 12:12

         S, notagrumpyfan, MichaelN – ‘makes it easy’ is simply the false part because reality, as I’ve pointed out many times, has been far different, especially on circuits that have never been overtaking-friendly, & even otherwise, only selected few track sections to any extent, mainly Kemmel straight since 2011.
         Lastly, Max didn’t really even need DRS, although even with that, he still didn’t reach P2 quite as quickly as I expected beforehand.

         HAL – That explains the slight sourness in his reference.
         1. 

            S
            13th August 2023, 12:57

            But DRS does often ‘make it easy’ for overtaking.
            Yes, it’s car and track dependent, but it isn’t false. It doesn’t have to be 100% true, 100% of the time – he didn’t claim that it does.
            His point is quite clear, as I’ve said times already in this article. As you can’t actively defend against DRS like you can with P2P, it most certainly does make it easier to overtake competitors.

            And being critical of F1 doesn’t equate to being sour. We are all critical of F1 at some point, and it’s usually justified.
            F1 isn’t perfect. Far, far from it.
         2. 

            notagrumpyfan
            13th August 2023, 19:24

            ‘makes it easy’ is simply the false part because reality, as I’ve pointed out many times, has been far different

            If YOU disagree with a statement, or (like in this case) don’t understand it, than that doesn’t make it a ‘false’ statement.
            Overtakes which were ‘just possible’ without DRS are now ‘easy’. Anybody can observe that on all but one circuit.
   5. 

      pastaman
      14th August 2023, 0:24

      Why would you assume no one asked him about it since it was clearly an interview.
3. 

   Alan Dove
   13th August 2023, 9:01

   Push 2 Pass is as bad as DRS, in some ways worse because IndyCar has a spec-chassis. F1 you have teams doing all they can to circumnavigate the intent of the regulations and thus creating cars that can’t follow or race together all that well, but what is IndyCar’s excuse? The fact they still need an overtaking aid is somewhat representative of a greater regulatory and design failure, which is layered upon a greater failure which is IndyCar can’t sustain multiple manufacturers as that isn’t popular enough.

   Also, it’s nice for Rahal to remind everyone that F1 exists as well. Rarely will you gear F1 mention other motorsports, they understand the value hierarchy. Let them talk about you, don’t talks about them.

   What’s interesting about P2P is it isn’t uncommon for a driver to get a break at the front in clean air and basically bank a ton of P2P. So the leader gets a double advantage. Clean air and free P2P for later in the race if they need it. Imagine modern F1 is P2P. Vertappen would just wait a few laps for the other driver to run out, then bam breeze past. So it’s as flawed as DRS in many respects. Either way both are flawed and distasteful. Necessary evils maybe, but flawed, as are the two compound rules.
   1. 

      Zann (@zann)
      13th August 2023, 9:32

      Lol yes he just had to try and have a little score over F1, even though what they have is Push to Prevent a Pass 😅
   2. 

      cdfemke (@cdfemke)
      13th August 2023, 10:08

      Is p2p the same thing as the overtake-button in F1, just regulated and limited by rules instead of engine degradation?
      1. 

         S
         13th August 2023, 10:36

         They are not the same.
         DRS reduces aerodynamic drag so that the trailing car can be faster on certain straights (as determined by the track layout and the FIA). The system is designed to compensate for aerodynamic (downforce) losses caused by following another car. When a car is within 1 second of the car ahead, DRS can be used at each designated area as many times as they are within that 1 second zone.
         It’s a necessity in current F1 because the technical regulations do not promote good racing cars.

         Indycar’s Push to Pass system, on the other hand, provides a power increase from the engine. It can be used anywhere on the track, and at any time – however, there is a limited amount of time available to use (eg 150 seconds). As such it provides increased strategic depth for drivers to use as they wish – but when they run out, they do not get any more and would be susceptible to anyone else who does have time available.
         It is not a necessary system, nor does it compensate for any deficiencies with the cars. It is purely a strategic addition to the racing competition.
         1. 

            Alan Dove
            13th August 2023, 10:52

            “It is not a necessary system, nor does it compensate for any deficiencies with the cars. It is purely a strategic addition to the racing competition”

            Can’t say I buy that as 90% of the race you are totally unaware of its use throughout the grid in terms of strategy. It only becomes relevant if there’s an off-set towards the end of the race and the driver behind has some spare over a driver in front. In that sense it’s just a more complex version of DRS. The clue is in the name “Push to Pass“. In the end it boils down to the same concept of off-set performance. One car in front has either more drag (no DRS) or less P2P. I don’t buy into the ‘it’s strategic’ narrative and that IndyCar doesn’t need it for passing. it does. Without the P2P late race off-set that usually occurs, the compound differential and safety cars IndyCar races would be dull as hell.
            1. 

               asz
               13th August 2023, 11:43

               One car in front has either more drag (no DRS) or less P2P.

               versus

               He was using it to stay ahead of me.

               I guess that is where ‘increased strategic depth’ comes in.
            2. 

               S
               13th August 2023, 12:27

               Can’t say I buy that as 90% of the race you are totally unaware of its use throughout the grid in terms of strategy.

               Yes – by design. It’s not a very good strategy if you tell all your competitors what you are doing with it constantly, is it…
               F1 has similar strategic elements too – often communicated in code so that competitors (supposedly) don’t know that they are talking about, and can’t use that information to neutralise it.

               In that sense it’s just a more complex version of DRS.

               If by ‘more complex’ you mean vastly different, then yes, it is.

               The clue is in the name “Push to Pass“

               The name itself is a misnomer for the sake of simplicity. It can be used for other means, including when a driver is completely on their own, and also for defensive purposes in combat.
               Not every use of it is to make a pass, nor is pushing that button guaranteed to successfully complete an overtake.

               In the end it boils down to the same concept of off-set performance.

               Only if it’s used in the same way that DRS is used. But it isn’t, because the P2P system has more depth of availability than DRS.
               Fundamentally, every overtake involves one car being faster than the other anyway – even if only for the exact duration that the button is being pushed.

               I don’t buy into the ‘it’s strategic’ narrative and that IndyCar doesn’t need it for passing. it does.

               You don’t have to buy it, it’s being given to you for free.
               It’s unfortunate that despite my explanation above, you still don’t see how one system can be used strategically and the other can’t.

               Let’s just focus on the last part, though – does Indycar really need it?
               I don’t think so. Yes, every object moving through the air will create aerodynamic turbulence that affects the following object – but every object is different, and the faster it goes, the more it creates…. How much is too much, though? There’s no doubt that F1 creates too much, and that’s exactly why they created and introduced the DRS system to work only with aero – but Indycar is different in that all cars use the same aerodynamic profile and make less overall downforce and turbulence. Speeds are lower, also – the aerodynamic ‘wake’ of an Indycar is substantially smaller and less turbulent than an F1 car even at the same given speed – and that’s without considering that Indycars have actually been designed from the ground up to race close together, taking that (known) wake into account.
               If Indycar simply switched off P2P completely, would the on-track racing product suffer? Not significantly, for the reasons mentioned above. Even if it did, it certainly wouldn’t drop anywhere near as far down as F1’s pathetically poor level if DRS were suddenly disabled (see F1 prior to DRS for proof, then multiply by the increased aerodynamic performance since that period).
               The simple facts about how P2P can be used at any time and at any part of the track, independent of any competitors, mean that its effect can always be nullified by the competitors themselves anyway. Not only that, but all competitors could run out of time, meaning nobody has access to it at all…

               All that shows that Indycar’s system is implemented strongly primarily, if not actually completely, for strategic benefit rather than to compensate for technical deficiency.
               If you can provide a comparably technical explanation of why this isn’t the case, I’d be keen to read it. Then I’ll be happy to get even more technical for you.

               Without the P2P late race off-set that usually occurs, the compound differential and safety cars IndyCar races would be dull as hell.

               Dull as hell???? How bad is F1 then???
               Wow – you really don’t like strategy, don’t you.
               P2P offsets, tyre compound choices and uncontrolled circumstances (such as weather and SC’s) are all glorious aspects of Indycar that are to be celebrated. How competitors deal with all the challenges that present themselves is what makes a winner a worthy one, IMO.
               Get those strategic plays wrong and you will invariably lose – and rightfully so, because someone else did a better job on the day. That’s what sport is about.
            3. 

               S
               13th August 2023, 12:41

               He was using it to stay ahead of me.
               I guess that is where ‘increased strategic depth’ comes in.

               That’s already at least twice as strategically deep as F1’s DRS, which only serves to make the following car faster on a specifically defined portion of track…
      2. 

         Facts&Stats
         13th August 2023, 19:53

         Is p2p the same thing as the overtake-button in F1, just regulated and limited by rules instead of engine degradation?

         Yes!
         Sorry if I just responded to a rhetorical question.
   3. 

      MichaelN
      13th August 2023, 11:45

      Push to pass is an artificial performance differentiator. It’s not strictly an overtaking aid, even if it’s misnamed to suggest that. It can be used at all times by anyone; when catching up, when defending, or when racing for a fast in-lap to get an undercut on someone.

      Push to pass is part of a package of such differentiators; together with fuel strategy, tyre compound strategy, custom dampers, and set-up options it gives teams and drivers some room to take their own approach throughout the races while still ensuring everyone is somewhat in the same ballpark. Arguably the two different engines are also part of this, but like in current F1, there’s a lot of balancing and equalizing that goes on behind the scenes to make sure both Honda and Chevrolet are pretty much the same.

      Push to pass in F1 would be fine; it had ‘overtake’ modes on engines it for years. The only limits on it were reliability rather than a regulated number of seconds. As so often, the open formula F1 claims to be was restricted and regulated under the guise of cost concerns (and they still manage to spend 150 million a year on bad cars that never win).

      If F1 had Push to pass now, there would be no need for Verstappen to wait for others to run out because he has other performance differentiators; namely a far superior car. It would be much more interesting in the battles down the grid, where cars are more similar and Push to pass would lead to prolonged battles, as it does in Indycar, rather than DRS fly bys, as DRS does in F1.
4. 

   S
   13th August 2023, 9:49

   Push 2 Pass is as bad as DRS, in some ways worse because IndyCar has a spec-chassis.

   I fail to understand how it is worse. At the very least, as there is a limited amount to use, it provides a strategic factor that DRS does not. It can also be defended against, with both/all competitors having access to it (unless they’ve chosen to use it all already).

   but what is IndyCar’s excuse?

   Excuse for what? Providing better racing and entertainment for viewers? Is that a bad thing?
   Indycar doesn’t need an overtaking aid (unlike F1) – but they choose to use it because it makes the racing better for all. It’s an addition to the product, whereas F1’s DRS acts solely as compensation for inherent flaws in the technical regulations and F1’s priorities as a whole.

   Rarely will you gear F1 mention other motorsports

   Yes, F1 is the pinnacle of ego and self-centredness. It’s also the peak of motorsports marketing.
   Besides, ‘F1’ is often talking about other series – female-only series are a hot topic at the moment, and there’s constant talk of FIA’s F2 and F3, plus all the recent rumblings about superlicence points distribution in other series (including Indycar). And just about everyone in F1 has commented on the level of driving talent available in Indycar in recent years.
   F1 may like to think of itself as the pinnacle, but it’s really just another series. Hardly anyone who watches Indycar regularly considers F1 to be a better/higher version of the sport – because it isn’t. It’s just different – a parallel series, with it’s own unique set of rules and challenges for competitors to face.

   Imagine modern F1 is P2P. Vertappen would just wait a few laps for the other driver to run out, then bam breeze past

   That’s because his car is inherently faster than the others. Of course he could overtake easily – just as he can now with DRS, except there’s nothing his competitor can do about it with DRS.
   P2P, on the other hand, is available to both of them. It may still be inevitable that Verstappen would end up ahead, but the battle could last a lot longer.
   1. 

      S
      13th August 2023, 9:50

      @Alan Dove
   2. 

      Alan Dove
      13th August 2023, 10:23

      It’s worse in the sense that overtaking aids are a compromise because the cars don’t have ‘natural racing’. In F1 you have a regulatory body trying to introduce technical regs that aid in ‘natural racing’ but you have design departments at said teams who do not prioritise it. DRS is awful, but the FIA can’t control the chassis whereas in IndyCar the aero is 95% controlled (there’s always set up and other tricks teams get up to you can’t control for). So having to have overtaking aids, if you can call them that, is an admission of technical design failure. I add the tyres into the mix too. The two compound thing is horrendous. And I’ve never seen a P2P pass in IndyCar that was more entertaining than a DRS pass. both are the same too me. A necessary evil but lame nonetheless.

      I don’t get the tactical element of P2P being good. The only element I care about is whether the driver behind can get a good exit from the previous corner and whether the driver in front can defend. But I am a karting man and I guess spoiled in that sense we can still have good racing without the fluff. It’s nice to watch the racing at least without that sinking feeling of someone being on a button. A pass is always a pass.

      Also, IndyCar doesn’t provide better entertainment. This just isn’t true. Entertainment comes in many form and you can see even on this website that IndyCar stores get a fraction of the comments as F1 does. It’s clear F1 is more entertaining (numbers don’t lie) and IndyCar is absolutely not a parallel series to F1. F1 is by quite some margin the dominant motorsport series and I don’t think there’s any young driver in IndyCar that wouldn’t drop the chance of 10 IndyCar championships for a chance in F1. IndyCar is still largely a spec-series that relies heavily upon the Indy500. Without that Indy500 it’d pretty much fall off the radar totally. Even the Indy500 has a local TV blackout to sell tickets for the race… I just don’t see how it’s more entertaining. There’s fundamentally less to be entertained about. Look at the frequency of articles about IndyCar vs Formula 1. It’s not even close.

      When IndyCar was multi-make and had the likes of Mansell, it was a real problem for F1, but now? It’s basically pinnacle level club racing when you look at the regulatory structure of it. I’d LOVE IndyCar to be more ruthless and offer real competition to F1. There’s lots to like like lack of power steering, lack of hybrid (well… until next year), immense circuits.. but it lacks the technical depth, the high stakes competition, the peril etc… I am harsh with my words because there’s some things it really does do better and would love a real alternative to F1, but as it is it’s a passive “oh the indycar’s on” kinda watching experience.
      1. 

         S
         13th August 2023, 11:01

         It’s worse in the sense that overtaking aids are a compromise because the cars don’t have ‘natural racing’.

         But Indycar does have ‘natural racing’. P2P is a strategic addition to it.
         DRS, on the other hand, compensates for a lack of it in F1.

         And I’ve never seen a P2P pass in IndyCar that was more entertaining than a DRS pass. both are the same too me.

         Well, that’s purely subjective. In Indycar, both drivers can race each other as they both have the same tools available – in F1, though, just one driver gets a free pass to get by the other.
         They are certainly not the same to me.

         It’s nice to watch the racing at least without that sinking feeling of someone being on a button.

         At least with Indycar, they can both use it – therefore effectively cancelling it out. That is at least 100% better than DRS to me.
         And I totally agree, karts are way better racing machines than both F1 and Indycar – but each and every series needs to have it’s own identity and unique positives/negatives, and all 3 we are talking about have those.

         Also, IndyCar doesn’t provide better entertainment. This just isn’t true.

         Totally subjective. I personally am more entertained by Indycar than I have ever been from F1, despite watching both for more than 30 years. Indycar is much more sport than F1, whereas F1 is more of a scientific design/engineering thing.
         It doesn’t matter how many comments they get on some website, nor is it a competition to get the most likes. This aspect (entertainment) is, as I said, subjective.
         Entertainment comes in many forms, as you say – but equally, it is interpreted by every individual as to its unique value to them. No two people want exactly the same things, nor value the exact same thing equally.
         All this ‘F1 is the dominant series’ stuff you go over is purely commercial. Yeah, F1 has a bigger audience – but that’s primarily because F1 attempts to connect with and appeal to the biggest audience. Is that actually better?
         Subjective.
         And Indycar drivers turn down F1 regularly. They might not turn down a drive in the current Red Bull, but they sure aren’t jumping at any chance to drive the latest Haas. They stick with Indycar because they’ve at least got approximately the same chance to win as everyone else, because their car is approximately the same as everyone else’s. If they lose, it’s rarely because they were simply in the wrong team, unlike F1.
         Remember where you live. Indycar is huge in the Amercias. Just because you don’t see it all the time doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Races are typically at a pretty terrible time of day, don’t forget – time zones are a thing.
         And hey, we can all pretend that something isn’t there if we don’t look for it. If we went by that theory, F1 only exists in my country a few times a year…

         Finally, I remind you again that Indycar is a domestic racing series, whereas F1 is a global world championship.
         When Indycar goes around the world on a 24-race championship, we’ll start comparing apples to apples. Until then, they are different because they are deliberately different and are targeting different audiences.
         You may not like Indycar as much as F1, but that’s your personal preference. Other people aren’t you.
         1. 

            MichaelN
            13th August 2023, 12:01

            This is important to stress; Indycar is not trying to compete with F1.

            It would be fairly simple for Indycar to make cars that rival F1 in terms of outright pace, but that’s not what they’re going for. They also don’t want to drag their stuff to the other side of the world. The current chassis and engines are good mix for it’s wide variety of North American tracks, and balance performance and raceability. It’s never to everyone’s tastes, of course, but the results are fairly good.

            While Indycar would certainly like to be more popular, it is – apparently – good enough to sustain itself. F1 on the other hand needs the money its constantly chasing around the globe. And to its credit, it has done so very well. The guaranteed pay-out to teams means the also-rans can fill the field with a sense of financial stability. Note, for example, how hosting fees have largely replaced B2C sponsorships and F1 cars are now largely billboards for a teams corporate partners.

            It’s just a different approach to a different goal.
            1. 

               Alan Dove
               13th August 2023, 12:47

               “This is important to stress; Indycar is not trying to compete with F1”

               … but F1 is muscling in on its territory though. Well attempting too, I can’t help but get bubble vibes about F1 currently.
            2. 

               S
               13th August 2023, 13:01

               Nobody is being forced to choose between F1 and Indycar – it’s not an either/or situation.
               People can support both, and appreciate both series for what they are – even if they both hold events in the same place.

               F1 is growing in popularity in the US, sure. But is it coming at the expense of, or doing harm to, Indycar?
               I don’t think so.
5. 

   ppzzus (@ppzzus)
   13th August 2023, 11:50

   im tired of growth, i want better racing.
   1. 

      notagrumpyfan
      13th August 2023, 20:01

      Racing is pretty good this year.
      Unfortunately, only 19 (without Verstappen) or 18 (excl. Sargeant) cars are involved in these races.
6. 

   Mayrton
   13th August 2023, 13:06

   What ‘Growth’? Are it single viewers watching an event and this increases throughout the year? Are it returning viewers? Are it marketable viewers, relevant for the sport’s sponsors? Are they viewers that put in an effort/subscription of some kind or did they get F1 as part of a bigger package of TV broadcasts?

   The sprint weekends are driving year-over-year growth in viewership. For example, the Spa total audience across race, sprint shoot-out and qualifying was up versus the Belgian GP last year.”

   How is that related to having a Sprint race? Or was it part of a growth also seen at other (non Sprint weekend) events? Statements like these leave me with more questions than answers which leads me to suspect it is vote-driving to drive shareholder value and has little to do with actually growing the sport.
   1. 

      S
      13th August 2023, 13:36

      How is that related to having a Sprint race?

      This year, Spa had a sprint race and attracted a larger audience.
      Last year, Spa had no sprint race and attracted a smaller audience.

      They can’t and won’t say if the two factors/results are linked or if it is a coincidence – all that matters to them is that the audience grew when something was different. This is marketing, and marketing is all about exploiting data, boosting positives and minimising (or completely ignoring) negatives.

      which leads me to suspect it is vote-driving to drive shareholder value and has little to do with actually growing the sport.

      Good – that’s exactly what it is about. Liberty are a marketing company, after all, and they do exist to make profit and be as attractive as possible to shareholders.
      To expect them to do and be anything else would be futile. They purchased F1’s commercial rights to make money. Lots of it.
7. 

   Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
   13th August 2023, 20:15

   It’s a World Championship. Has been since 1950. One Million Viewers is nothing in “England”.
8. 

   Martin (@f1hornet)
   14th August 2023, 12:12

   I agree with the COTD, especially because varying the nature of the race track means you potentially shake up the competitive order. Some cars and drivers will be better on a street circuit, or a permanent circuit, a high speed track, a track at altitude, etc. Changing the format of race weekends also has the downside that I end up missing stuff: I expect Qualifying to be on a Saturday, then find I missed it because it was on a Friday, or I miss the Vegas GP altogether because I’m out on Saturday night.

   We used to have a pre-Bernie world where the races had very different weekends with races even being on different days, and we got rid of that precisely because it made commercialising the sport difficult! It seems strange to go back to varying things up.
9. 

   Asd
   14th August 2023, 12:17

   Wow, my first COTD, while I’ve been active on this website since 2008 :)

   The motorsport community needs to appreciate and cherish Scott Dixon more. He’s been a beast among 2 decades worth of the best young talent there is in all of racing, both in Indycar and LeMans.
10. 

    Don
    14th August 2023, 16:14

    Simply amazing that F1 continues to grow as BORING as it is!

Comments are closed.