Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 253 posts

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#221

Post by Someone »

jackgavigan wrote: post #114
davej wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the comparison but it's really not "much the same". Modern F1 cars are much much better (not just faster) than they were in 1972. The strict technical regulations are in place for two main reasons: 1. To allow teams with smaller budgets to compete. 2. To focus innovation away from simply making bigger, more powerful engines with computers managing every facet of driver input and car output. That kind of…

> 1. To allow teams with smaller budgets to compete. There's a far better way to help the smaller teams: Split the sport's revenues more equally. Under the current regime, the top teams receive many times the amount the smallest teams do (e.g. more than a 9x difference between what the Constructors' Champion receives and the paltry $10m the bottom two teams are given) - http://www.hindustantimes.com/Images/Popup/2012…

But if you look at total income, the difference still is huge. The top has way more income from merchandise, sponsorship, and revenue share from UEFA tournaments (champions league, in particular)

For example, http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9N... shows that Manchester United had £320M revenue in 2012; 'only' £60M of that is from those broadcast rights.

At the bottom, http://www.wolves.co.uk/news/article/wolves-headline-financi... reports a total revenue of £60.6M.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#222

Post by walshemj »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #216
walshemj wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure the premiership is a good model it sucks all of the money away from the lower divisions. The premiership also has been trying to wall its self off from the other clubs so that they dont have relegation - unlike the NFL the worst performing teams get relegated which keeps the teams honest to an extent.

The one thing I think all US sports should incorporate is the idea of relegation. It make the rest of the season so much more exciting. It's like one of the commentators pointed out. The Premiership is one of those leagues that even if you're mid-table, you might be safe since there are more points between say the #1 team and the #5 team as opposed to the number of points which separate the #5 team and the #20 team.…

yes though American sports seems to run on socialist lines can you imagine Man U not being allowed to sign the next pele.

"sorry lad we love to sign you but rules is rules your going to be playing for Gillingham F.C in the second division of the Beezer homes League"

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#223

Post by lutorm »

BashiBazouk wrote: post #151
ronaldx wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much the same in cycling - there are many innovations that could potentially improve speeds: as a simple example, recumbent cycles are faster under many conditions. But, the UCI sets its rules based on innovations up to 1972, in order to make a fair comparison with Eddy Merckx. Consumer bikes surely suffer for this lack of innovation at race level.

"recumbent cycles are faster under many conditions" Is this demonstrably true under less than ideal conditions? I have been a cyclist for almost four decades and for a good three of those recumbent bicycles have been touted as faster and better. Yet I have never been passed by a recumbent. Not once. Ever. I have on the other hand passed many, though admittedly there are few on the road and usually ridden by old farts…

There is a strong selection effect given that people who are competitive bicyclists in general won't ride recumbents since you will then be restricted to HPV competitions.

The tradeoff is smaller frontal area vs higher weight. See http://www.recumbents.com/wisil/hein/Hpvpaper.htm

Re: handling, my Lightning recumbent is way more nimble than any bicycle I've ever ridden, precisely because the wheelbase is shorter and the CG is lower to the ground than a normal bicycle.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#224

Post by mikeklaas »

SeanLuke wrote: post #160
curveship wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is wrong on two important levels: - the UCI limits bicycles so that it's a race between cyclists, not bank accounts. Currently, a top pro's bike costs about $10-15k, and a competitive bike can be bought for as low as $2-3k (even lower at the amateur level). If they removed the technical limitations, that number would be at least an order of magnitude higher, and potentially two or three. - bike races are not jus…

> - the UCI limits bicycles so that it's a race between cyclists, not bank accounts. The UCI has been hypocritical, inconsistent, and mendacious in its claims here. At the dawn of racing the UCI banned the recumbent Velocar not because it was so much faster (it was), but because the powerful (ahem) upright bicycle lobby demanded it. The there was the Moulton, which started winning lots of races on its 17" tires in th…

Can you give a list of races won on a Moulton? It seems surprising, if true.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#225

Post by undees »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #217
ronaldx wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much the same in cycling - there are many innovations that could potentially improve speeds: as a simple example, recumbent cycles are faster under many conditions. But, the UCI sets its rules based on innovations up to 1972, in order to make a fair comparison with Eddy Merckx. Consumer bikes surely suffer for this lack of innovation at race level.

>>>>> as a simple example, recumbent cycles are faster under many conditions Ever tried to pedal one of those things up a mildly steep hill?

I ride a short wheel base recumbent, and regularly pass upright bicycles on moderate uphills.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#227

Post by Zizzle »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #103
davej wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the comparison but it's really not "much the same". Modern F1 cars are much much better (not just faster) than they were in 1972. The strict technical regulations are in place for two main reasons: 1. To allow teams with smaller budgets to compete. 2. To focus innovation away from simply making bigger, more powerful engines with computers managing every facet of driver input and car output. That kind of…

away from simply making bigger, more powerful engines with computers managing every facet of driver input and car output While there has been some of this back in the 80s (e.g., the Williams FW14B[1]), these regulations are also blocking a whole lot of real out-of-the-box thinking. When I think of technical innovations from F1, I think of cars that showcased really unusual technologies. Some of my favorites have been…

But in the 80s and 90s they weren't heading towards big iron.

It was the opposite. 1.5 litre engines with a lot of boost making more horsepower than they do now.

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#228

Post by kansface »

7952 wrote: post #38
polymatter wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when its no longer entertaining

I would argue that it was more entertaining before it was made safe through technological advancements. It would be interesting to see a series that used self driving cars that could take more risks.

An optimal strategy may be to wreck the other cars. This would be a great (if not an expensive sport).

Re: Formula 1′s Leading Team Has a Big Secret

#229

Post by SeanLuke »

mikeklaas wrote: post #224
SeanLuke wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - the UCI limits bicycles so that it's a race between cyclists, not bank accounts. The UCI has been hypocritical, inconsistent, and mendacious in its claims here. At the dawn of racing the UCI banned the recumbent Velocar not because it was so much faster (it was), but because the powerful (ahem) upright bicycle lobby demanded it. The there was the Moulton, which started winning lots of races on its 17" tires in th…

Can you give a list of races won on a Moulton? It seems surprising, if true.

Try here: http://www.moultonbicycles.co.uk/heritage.html Prior to the ban, Moultons had just started doing well in British races. Moultons are presently banned under UCI rule 1.3.018.
Post reply on HN