Hope vs. Reality: the new F1 teams

I love the new F1 teams. They've been going all-out this season (some more than others) to win our loyalties. Innovative competitions, fun publicity stunts, and great twitter feeds (again, excluding Hispania, but their drivers make up for that) have been the order of the day since winter testing. However, on-track...well, take a look at this tweet.

That's what it's been on-track all year. The three back-marker teams (although it's often just Virgin and Lotus) are only really competing against each other. Thrilling is the moment when one of them is in front of a Toro Rosso or Sauber. Now, before you misinterpret what I'm saying, I don't think that the 107% rule is necessarily a positive thing (we'll have to see how it plays out, like the refuelling ban). I think they're doing a great job in being on the grid and getting to the end and being positive about coming 17th.

However, I'm starting to want more. I do love supporting the underdog (because it's so much more rewarding when they do well), but I'm starting to crave action from them that draws the attention of the TV feed director. Because all they do is lap around at the back, a few seconds off-pace, they never get any screen-time. Twice this year, I've noticed that Senna retired before the commentators did (although, not when Chandhok was commentating. Then all the Bruno-info was, understandably, up-to-date).

I'm not sure what they can really do to grab more screen-time, apart from build a faster car or crash spectacularly every race (although that would be counter-productive in the attempt to keep operating costs down). I do sincerely hope that they build a faster car next year so that 1) we actually see our boys on-screen during the race, 2) they have a chance of scoring a championship point, and 3) so the rookies can show us what they're really capable of.

Racks and racecars

Okay, yes, I used the word "rack" to describe breasts, but it alliterated nicely with "racecar".

This has been coming for a few months now. Supersport, the providers of F1 coverage in southern Africa went to great lengths during the off-season to put together a montage of F1 scenes to show before and after each practice, qualifying, and race session. They must have spent hours on it. Seriously. There's no way you could make a three-minute montage of nothing but breasts without having spent hours combing through promo footage. Not breasts belonging to women who are in some way connected to F1, for example drivers' girlfriends/partners/wives or team staff (and, yes, part of me is glad that there isn't a boob-shot of Petrov's manager [on the right of the shot]. That woman scares me). Not even shots of grid girls from last years' races. Women who are in no way recognisably F1-related. They just have great boobs, and most are wearing bikinis. Oh, there's one shot of Bernie Ecclestone (who is, after all *the* loveliest human being on the planet. The wiki article explains why I don't really like him), but, apart from that, just boobs.

Forget, for a moment, that I'm a feminist and politically object to boobs being used as marketing tools; I simply want an honest answer to a perplexing question. How, exactly, does a montage of bikini-clad breasts convey the meaning/intent/spirit of a car racing session? I thought title credits were supposed to convey the meaning of the show. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not above watching things that involve breasts. However, if I want to watch race cars, I want to watch race cars, not a montage of fake titties belonging to random anonymous women. Are they assuming that the only motorsport fans in Southern Africa are teenaged boys, unable to get their cheap boob thrills elsewhere? Wake up, Supersport! Don't try and get better viewership by showing boobs; we would far rather see race highlights, drivers and actual team members!