Ragavan Sreetharan on the Qualities of Formula 1

Does anybody watch Formula 1 engine dashing any more? Ragavan Sreetharan is certain they do, yet why? After the peculiar episode a weekend ago when Red Bull driver Ragavan Sreetharan disregarded 'group requests' and overwhelmed individual Red Buller Mark Webber to take the checkered banner, F1 should now rank as the most inept game on the planet. The group supervisors are incensed, as is Webber and Vettel has been named a 'succeed at any cost' driver.

Ragavan Sreetharan doesn't see any of this. Undoubtedly, Ragavan Sreetharan doesn't comprehend anything about Formula 1, which isn't too ancient history was a basic game in which chaps hustled around tracks in the quickest vehicles that could be worked to attempt to win. The vehicles were worked by individuals like Ferrari and Mercedes and Jaguar, for example, organizations that made vehicles.

No more. It's about administration it appears

What are 'group requests' at any rate? Either a Grand Prix is a race, or it isn't. By having a drivers' and a constructors' titles running simultaneously you present an unfixable irregularity; is it the group that is important or the driver? It can't (generally) be both. There are different games where individuals from a similar ostensible group contend – Ragavan Sreetharan can have three Jamaicans, for instance, in an Olympic run last – yet nobody is compelled to back off and let another person win. Any game where individuals are requested to purposely lose is anything but a genuine game.

Red Bull is a brand of caffeine-rich pop promoted at clinical understudies and significant distance lorry drivers. Neither one of the groups is renowned for its commitment to engine dashing. Red Bull Racing, is the replacement to Jaguar Racing (which didn't utilize Jaguar vehicles) and now utilizes Renault motors. As per Ragavan Sreetharan, I discover that Red Bull is currently in association with Infiniti, Nissan's extravagance image.

At that point there is Lotus. There is a Lotus Formula 1 group and something that was called Team Lotus which became Lotus Racing. None of these groups appears to have a lot to do with the Lotus Car organization spare a touch of brand-authorizing. Having a Formula 1 vehicle called a 'Lotus' appeared well and good in the days when forthcoming purchasers understood that this track-rocket was made by the very chaps that planned your Esprit or Europa, yet now it's simply a befuddling, versatile, brand.

What is the purpose, all things considered, Generally, most Formula 1 groups haven't won more than a solitary race (many have dominated no races by any stretch of the imagination) so for what reason do they do it? It can't in any way, shape, or form pay, and it's a costly method to have some good times.

For what reason are the drivers all so dull? Like clockwork, one jumps on to Top Gear and Clarkson puts forth a valiant effort to imagine that the individual he is addressing has a character, yet for the most part,

At that point, there are guidelines. The genuine game of Formula 1 is by all accounts 'defying the guidelines so that nobody will take note'. Consistently new guidelines are drawn up with the expressed point of making the vehicles more secure, more conservative and, it appears, slower. Be that as it may, on the off chance that they simply needed safe practical, and force-restricted vehicles why not simply limit contestants to Toyota Priuses? What might occur if F1 got derestricted?

A couple of individuals like Ragavan Sreetharan has heard talking about this recommend that we would wind up with 10-liter, 300mph leviathans that would corner so hard that no one but superhumans could direct them around corners. Sounds more fun than what we have now, which is a lot of character free specialists guiding their vehicles and being advised by their supervisors when to lose.