The Economics of Crashing in Formula 1
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 05. 2024
- ⏱ Timestamps
00:00 The Economics of Crashing
00:52 A Brief History
03:00 Why F1 Needs Crashes
04:18 How Much Do Crashes Actually Cost?
05:41 The Future
🎬 About
Athletic Interest is a video essay series that investigates business stories from the world of sports.
✅ Follow
Email list: athleticinterest.substack.com/
Instagram: / athleticinterest
🍿 Watch more
Most popular: bit.ly/36ZZ3Qe
Latest video: bit.ly/2MpsDW6
💡 If you wondered about the safety figures, here's our source for the stats behind F1 Driver Protection:
www.sportseconomics.org/sport...
#formula1 #f1 #crashes - Sport
Suggesting f1 race virtually is like saying we should play football using fifa 😂😂
Well you could argue that an F1 simulator is much closer to the real racing experience than playing Fifa is to playing Champions League football 🤓
yeah true haha @@AthleticInterest
or like replacing the NFL with madden
@@AthleticInterest but the main purpose of f1 is a better engineered car. you cannot simulate everything virtually, like each team needs to put in so much tech just to gain some milliseconds. most of the tech in normal cars is somewhat related to f1 cars, also people want to see fit athletes which isn't viable in vr,
I mean as Esports, it makes sense but its not motorsport then
The total amount of crashes in a season isnt a good metric to use, since there are a lot more races nowadays. Crashes per race is a beter metric
Still doesn’t account for the fact that better safety equipment has psychological impact on drivers to push more. Or the difference in weight and size of the cars over time
"The total amount of crashes in a season" is a relevant metric for team's spending and how good is the cost cap
More races is more taxing on the body and ends up in more crashes, so total crashes is indeed useful. Your point is relevant...but both total crashes and crashes per race are important for different reasons.
@@mahoganywood6468 The concorde agreement states that the cost cap is pushed up in the event of more races. They can have 25 races tops per year.
Title of this video is quite misleading. "Why Formula 1 Doesn't Want Safe Races" - ends up explaining why F1 is one of the safest motorsport out there.
Spot On 👏👏👏
Well, not on some occasions.
Did you finish watching the video before posting this comment?
@@abdulrafiuabdulazeez9924 simple answer is yes, the video gives reasons why F1 would like unsafe races, but none of their actions suggest they want it. So the title "why formula 1 doesn't want safe races" is misleading. A better video is " Is Formula 1 entertaining without crashes". An interesting question with probably better points to cover.
It's changed now
One man who undoubtedly saved lives in motorsport was Sir Jackie Stewart. He helped introduce seatbelts, full face helmets, run off areas and increased marshalling at circuits.
niki was also quite important in that regard
Disappointed that Roland Ratzenberger, who also died on that fateful weekend in 1994 wasn't mentioned; everyone seems to forget about him. The HANS device (Neck Brace) might have helped reduce the probability of his accident being fatal, but it wouldn't have been implemented in the years that followed without his crash, as well as Senna's. Best to remember that.
Its always a bit of a shame he's not mentioned. Ayrton AND Rolands death made that weekend one of the darkest in F1 history. Both their deaths and legacies had the drivers demanding reform.
At minute 0:57 his picture is there, right next to Ayrton Senna.
Hey, I love this channel and absolutely love that you're exploring F1. Its the pinnacle of motorsport and its generally 20 of the best drivers in the world driving the fastest cars in the world, built by some of the best minds and engineers in the world. Id love to see more on it, but I do think this video was fairly surface level and you may have lost your thesis through the video.
You guys are normally really amazing at extrapolating relevant data and applying it to the argument, but I think the fundamental direction of the video was a bit flawed. F1 does promote and understand crashes are what draw temporary eyes. Zhous Silverstone crash was everywhere, but again temporary views. Its hard to turn shock value into a consistent and loyal viewership, and though the crashes make for good promotional material to show off the sports intensity and little room for error. It's not a fundamental philosophy behind F1s choices nor a reliable method to draw in long-term fans. I think exploring all the things F1 is doing to bring one of the most watched global sports to even more people would be an amazing video. But again, I think you started out with a thesis and then found all the things F1 has done to make the sport safer don't apply to that thesis. What does apply is their slow application of safety rules. Ayrton died in 1994, and the Halo wasn't introduced until Jules crashed and subsequently passed away. And even then it took them 4 years to implement it. You could have spoken about the huge concerns about sausage curbs, which fans, media, and drivers have voiced serious concerns about for years. Even after a seriously dangerous crash in F2 where Roy Nissany got launched into Dennis Haugers Halo after missing a corner and flying up one into traffic. You could have spoken about how in Suzuka Pierre Gasly was given a 20 second penalty, and lost 2 points because he was speeding during a red flag even though they made the exact same mistake that led to Jules death which was bringing out the tractor with cars still going around an extremely wet and blinding track. Or even the audacity penalize Sainz and Ferrari for not ensuring drain covers are meeting the standards that modern cars demand down-force-wise on tracks. Carlos could have been killed in Las Vegas, and instead of accepting any sort of blame, F1 and the FIA made Ferrari pay for the cars repairs, and then gave them a 10 place grid penalty for needing those repairs. They're extremely slow with safety changes and only seem to make changes when serious injuries or deaths are involved, even in scenarios that are obvious safety hazards. Their lack of oversight and predicting something that might cause a crash or exponentially increase the risk of a bigger accident might have been a good point to make. Just look at Bahrain. Despite learning about the necessity of checking drain covers and being proactive about it, they let 2 more drain covers come up and damage cars and put drivers at risk. It also hurt their product despite being reminded on avery big stage in Vegas that these cars create unprecedented amounts of downforce tracks that need to be modernized with the right safeguards need to be put in place.
F1 is great, and we should absolutely praise them for making the advancements they've made, things like the Halo have saved countless lives, the barriers have saved lives, and so on. I don't mean to say they don't care about safety, but the fact that they're slow to implement these changes, know the risks, and potentially mitigate those risks but refuse to do so until someone gets hurt or dies could have been better points to make for the video's title.
Regardless, I know you guys will continue to put out extremely high-quality content, but this one was a bit off for me. I'd love more F1 content though, but it's absolutely a sport that requires a lot of deep research and understanding of the sport and its nuances to be able to articulate any argument. Hopefully, you'll be able to do that going forward, in fact, based on your past videos, I know you will and you're capable of it! It's one of the things I love about this channel, your research is highly admired. In this video, the research was just misplaced and fairly surface-level! Hopefully, you can take a bit of constructive criticism!
Thanks mate, you make some good points. I appreciate the feedback. Our aim was less to make the argument that F1 is actually trying to make the sport unsafe, but rather to talk about the ambivalent relationship of F1 (or motorsport in general) to the risk of crashing. But perhaps we could have dug a little deeper and added a little more nuance.
@@AthleticInterest Absolutely! I do see that direction, but the title did seem like you were drawing more of a relationship between promoting crashes and viewership/fans/money because of said crashes, I think the new title is much more fitting! Regardless, been a viewer for a while and a subscriber. You guys set the bar extremely high for high-quality sports-centric content on this platform. Ive learned so much watching your content throughout the years. I want to see you guys succeed and I think F1 is a great audience to grow your channel through. Hopefully this videos reactions arent a deterrent for exploring the sport some more in future content. I know the team behind this channel does their content and topics justice and am happy to provide any supplementing information and constructive criticism. Looking forward to the next video!
Maybe its because the cars are way too big now. Used to be able to go 4 wide, now your lucky to get 2 wide through most corners.
0:56 38 drivers died, not people there were track marschalls too
I’m just one voice, so take this or leave it. The content output on this channel is SUPERB. The clickbait title isn’t necessary. We understand that ultimately, you need to ride the line between content quality, and using the algorithm to your advantage. But a deliberately misleading video title isn’t what this channel is about. Don’t go down that route 😊
Thanks for the constructive feedback, we really appreciate it 😊. We discussed the title in our team and we all felt that we were giving enough context in the video to not be misleading. But as you said, it is a fine line sometimes. At the moment we feel comfortable with it, but comments like yours do make us think and we might change it at some point.
6:05 you can't be serious
These doofuses have never watched a single F1 race and talk about crashing as if it was scripted
i agree with the comments, f1 isnt crash free cause the cars are so aerodinamically advanced and the regs missed the point of allowing close following so much that any close racing is way more prone to incidents. as you noted, safety for the driver has been the main reason why cars are so big now, so even tho more crashes happen that wont hurt drivers as much as it will hurt racing, as we've seen with max verstappen who at any chance he has will put the driver he's fighting with in a "let me pass or we both crash" situation. its the best way to defend.
Sorry! But headline is SO WRONG, & misleading. This channel is superb, & can do better! :)
Explain why?
@@kennykeegan6499 Because The Sport is doing everything they can for it to be as Safe as possible :)
It's not better anymore though, is it? It once was.
Channel does it on purpose. Clickbait ‘Why F1 doesn’t want safe races’ title to get some early engagement and views then later down the line it’ll change the title.
It supposed to say "doesn't want CLEAN race."
"NO head rest, no Max Verstappen 😂"
😂😂😂
Max, you put on the pussy pads?
The title of this video is misleading. There is so much that is wrong about this video. Also I can almost guarantee that you are not a Motorsport fan let alone an F1 fan.
The graphic with crashes per Season is so misleading. More races in modern f1 mean more Crashes. That is the simple reason
You got called out the other day for lack of research 😂
Excellent Video as always
The opening to this video is slightly misleading… “more crashes despite years of innovation”
The innovation is what brought about the reduced severe injury and death thru the crashes, none of these innovations asides from changing some of the track layouts were to reduce the number of crashes, they were all to reduce the impact of these crashes.
man do I love when you upload F1 content
The last line is genius 🤣🤣
For me there are three main factors for the increase in crashing.
- Cars are a lot more reliable now compared to even 15 years ago. Breaking down used to be the most common reason for retiring from a race, but since this has reduced, drivers have more opportunities to crash.
- With safety increasing, crashing has less consequences for a driver (less chance of injury/death) so they can afford to make riskier attacking/defensive moves in races.
- More races = more opportunities to crash.
amazing how u guys explain things so well in so little time
Good video. Can you do more videos on Formula 1 and cycling, please?
I admit I have not been watching F1 since the days of Hakkinen and Schumi, but when I did it wasn't for the off chance of a crash. I actually preferred the drivers to stay in the race and fight for positions, that's the drama.
Yea. It’s exciting when a good battle ends in a crash but it also neutralizes the race a bit since the tension of the battle is gone
Nice video, great editing skills and well narrated, ever considered making a documentary in netflix?
This was very interesting. Crashes per season isn't the most valid metric, of course, but it might be the only metric available for the history of F1. To measure actual safety, something like collisions per 1000 miles would be more valid. To measure the economic value, we would need to relate collisions to an economic measurement: per 1000 viewers/season? per $1 million of market size adjusted for inflation?
I thought you were football channel but these videos are cool 👏
One of the greatest devices not mentioned is the HANS device. Without that I’m 100% certain we would see more fatalities because of drivers snapping their necks from the insane g-forces they encounter when they crash.
Solid video
The 135 million cost cap does not include the salary of the drivers and the top 3 paid team members (for example team principal)
Never forget Roland Ratzenberger! The lad died the day before Senna did in Imola Qualifying.
That's something new I am hearing today.
Do these guys change thumbnails?
This is really interesting considering there was no retirements at the most recent race
This one of the reasons why I like bike racing more than car racing. Bike crash looks physically rougher so I never want to see any riders fall off. Also, overtakes are more close and frequent so the company doesn't really need to rely on crashing - at least compared to F1 - to promote their races.
We want close racing and people pushing the limit and sometimes crashing is the result of going over the limit but no one hopes for these dangerous crashes where people are close to being seriously hurt. It's just that those moments go viral but no fan hopes for them.
Crazy how Schumaker survived the whole career in F1 but was taken out on a mountain
Skiing off piste is almost certainly more dangerous than driving in F1, so it's not that crazy.
Ski dont have Hans/Halo and Mountains dont have Tecpro barriers, is waaaaaay riskier
crashes are fun except the part that the race is suspended for half an hour :(
POV: Athletic Interest is uploading about F1 and your day is saved
A boost before the weekend 😉
There are more crashes because the risks are lower because the cars are safer. The driver can push it further now and he’s probably not going to die if he just bounces off the barriers. Whereas 40 years ago a car would split in two and catch fire at the slightest impact.
An average Formula 1 car is about 5.5m (or longer) x 2m. Or about 18 ft x 6.5 ft (216 in x 78 in). Or about the size of a 2024 Ford Transit cargo van (which according to Ford's website is 219.9 in x 83.2 in with the mirrors folded in)
The best-selling car in Europe in 2023 was the Tesla Model Y, which is 750mm (30 in) shorter than an F1 car. Two other popular cars, the Peugeot 208 and the Dacia Sandero, are even shorter, at around 4 m long and about 1.75-1.85m wide.
The best-selling vehicle in the US was the Ford F-150 which is just slightly shorter (209 in) and 83.6 in wide with the mirrors folded. The best-selling car in the US was the Toyota Camry which is 192 in x 72 in, or 2 feet shorter and 6 inches narrower.
All this basically is to point out that these drivers are launching HUGE cars around these tracks, or more increasingly these city streets, at insane speeds and being asked to keep precise control of them constantly. They're probably bigger than anything you drive and going at multiples of your top speed. The fact that there aren't more crashes is testament to the drivers' skill, and the fact they're as safe as they are speaks volumes about the improvements in safety design. But even so, there have still been drivers lost in the top-tier feeder series like F2 and F3 in recent years. It's much much MUCH safer, but still VERY dangerous.
Hold up, there's more crashes today than ever?? I really felt they rarely ever crash anymore compared to when I watched in the 90s??
What is this outro music?
6:05 this sounds like something chatgpt would say 💀
Make video on cricket topic ❤
I'm pretty sure the intention behind putting sprinklers on racetracks is not to increase crashes, but to close the gaps between the teams. Wet races are often very entertaining and thrilling, because they are much more down to driver skill instead of how good your car is. In a dry race, the Red Bulls are unreachable at the moment. Before Red Bull, it was the same with Mercedes. In a wet race, we often see very skilled drivers display incredible performances, even though they are in inferior cars and it's not "the same result we always get." Obviously crashes and safety cars add to the drama, but i don't think that that was the intent behind it. In the rain, you don't put the cars top speed or high speed cornering performance to the limit, so the field is much closer togehter (and it seems like it's more about the driver).
I started watching f1 in 2019 because of drive to survive and have been watching every season since. I like the sport. It has a lot o emotions and surprises but the gap between the teams are huge. It became boring. They changed the car too much and on track it changed nothing really. It would be better if a higher number of theam fought in the front pack.
Williams is already high up in the standings of crash costs in 2024 😂
mooooore vids plz
"Grosjean"'s name sweet pronunciation 🤤
the best solution is to just allow cost of repairs from crashes to be excluded from the cost cap.
Some points are good, but, I believe that F1 and FIA don't want crashes even it brings more money in. They want drama like in 2021 and crashing brings the most of it.
The videos' conclusion is really weird of course F1 isn't going to be a sim race competition.
You wouldn't suggest that the world cup would be decided by playing the FIFA video game right? Like that's absurd. Outside of that it's an entertaining video.
Atrocious clickbait, ATROCIOUS
F1 regulations are dominated by safety, which is why the cars end up being so large and heavy
You realise there are more crashes in the present because there are more races and sprints, right? 2024 season there are 24 races, in the ‘50/‘60 there was around 8 races every year
The cost cap including "everything" is not correct, it has a lot of exclusions, like the driver salaries, for example.
Having to pay crash damage from your own pocket doesn't seem fair when someone else is responsible for it, they should really change that.
Wow 😳
2024 calendar isn't correct. Not all races are on Saturdays
i’m sure Formula 1 also wants Max to stop dominating too
title isa big clickbait, thats why im here, thats why i will report title, and give you thumb down. F1 is THE MOST safe motosport in the world. its even more safe than cycling.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:28 *🏎️ Formula 1 capitalizes on the allure of crashes for audience engagement, despite advancements in safety measures over the years.*
01:49 *⚠️ Ayrton Senna's fatal crash in 1994 prompted significant safety improvements in Formula 1, including better barriers, neck rests, and the introduction of the Halo device.*
04:41 *💰 Crashes in Formula 1 incur significant financial costs for teams, with millions of dollars spent on repairs and replacements, impacting overall budgets and development efforts.*
05:10 *🛠️ The introduction of a cost cap in Formula 1 heightens the financial impact of crashes, affecting team resources and competitiveness, especially with the addition of more street circuit races.*
Made with HARPA AI
good video, but the idea of a virtual replacement is just complete bullshit in my opinion
Didnt Jos Verstappen called out Max for using the neck rest calling it the pussy rest or something? Great parenting right there.
I can see, your recent video titles are misleading.
No neck brace, no max verstappen 😂
No Neck rest No Max Verstappen 😂😂😂
How can this channel have less than 1M subscribers?? It is insane the quantity of sh*t channels with sh*t content that have millions of subscribers, however this high quality content channel with amazing economic value has less than 1M???? It just doesn't make sense. Something is wrong. Thanks for the amazing content
"No neck rest, no Max Verstappen" Lmao what 💀
2:55 Hamilton's life was not saved by the Halo. But the Halo has definitely saved Grosjeans life, maybe Zhous. (Analysis below by random redditor)
2021 Monza was low speed, the RB slid across the halo and barely grazed Hamilton's helmet. It was not top-down or a side-impact, just a grazing motion. Compare this to Martin Brundle, Brazil 1994. He was smashed on the head by the wheel of another Verstappen, much harder. No Halo, No headrest. Walked away, sore neck.
2022 Silverstone Zhou may have been injured, killed or maybe walked away. Pedro Diniz, 1999 at Nurgburgring, also not injured after landing on his head after a roll-bar failure. Albeit at lower speed. But, that was without the Hans device, without the padded cockpit sides and also no halo.
2018 Leclerc at Spa (hit by Alonso), but if you put a large hoop around an object, it's going to get hit. It doesn't mean the head will. His head was not in the way
2020 Bahrain, Grosjeans cockpit smashing through metal fencing? The Halo saved Romain, no doubt. Would he have survived without it? Not today. In 2008? Possible. Cars were much lighter, we had refuelling(less fuel in car), and it is not a given the car would have enough mass to penetrate the barrier.
Game's gone soft
What would the RB have slid across had the halo not been there? 🤔
No difference. At the brief moment the tire slid across Lewis' helmet, the car was being supported by rollhoop and wasn't touching the halo @@krissavagelive
@@rycx3945now circle back to what you said originally. Second paragraph, first sentence.
@@krissavagelive was a reddit thread but It's true, doesn't contradict with what I said
Your tone sounds like you accusing F1 of intentionally causing crashes foe view 😂
Solid vid. Thx
Thank you!
Hii Athletic Interest another quality content
Thanks a lot! 😉
What was the point of the video?
If Europe is going away from combustion engines, don't you think F1 will go away as well?
Where is that accent from?
🇩🇪
@@AthleticInterest nice.. great video btw.👍
we don't watch because of the crashes if it turns virtual a big chunk of F1 is lost, what about engineering ? how would we know which is the better car? simulation isn't 100% real driving the athletic part of it is lost the G force resistance, core training and real life reflexes in the moment not behind a desk .
I think this just shows your lack of knowledge on F1
More street circuits more crashes!
Did you really just suggest sim racing replaced real racing LOL
The most stupid ending that Athletic Interest has had. F1 already races virtually and it is called E-SPORTS. The only reason it is called Motorsport because they do it in real world on track
This title is misleading, the statistics are flawed considering the amount of races held since the 2000s. Also, the hook in the video is disingenuous, the sport doesn't want to promote crashing.
You recently expressed your will to produce less videos while upping the quality. Considering your last videos, their titles and angles covered, you missed the target. You disinterested me and many here. Enjoy your clickbait, I'll go spend my time elsewhere.
Was I click-baited?
Let’s hope Verstappen is the 39th?
6:05 Is this a joke?
And what about theory, now we have more crashes because we have more races in season? this video doesn't make any sense. If you make football match 5hours long, you will see more goals.
more speed more crash
Video about F1!! LETS GOOOOOO!!!
It was time! 😉
Virtual! Did he just say Virtual? Thats Madness I dont even watch nor care for e-sport who is this dude and there are more crashes in this day and age than before coz the vehicles are fater and safer hence drivers are willing to push to the limit taking more risks any half decent F1 fan will you that...Virtual get out of here with that madness mate.
yeeee 5th
No neck rest => No Max Verstappen 😂🤣🤣
When I was very young I only watched for the crashes, but I stayed for the game
the simulator idea sucks
Fourth
12 points for fourth 🏁
Second
🥈
What are you even talking????? Its like lets stay in a virtual world to save the environment
First
🥇🤏
F1 crashes has more views ? Really !! Let s check 😅 !
Lol what if F1 raced virtually? Oh wait, it already exists, its called Sim Racing!!
I love this channel, but this is by far the worst and most misleading video here
What a catfish of a video
Extremely bad title. Yes everybody knows about clickbait but do better man, this is damaging the media landscape beyond your channel.
Terrible video clearly made for the drama and disrrgarding many obvious factors in racing and using irrelevant metrics.