F1 ideas

[RacingManiac]

That's a hard question it seems... They say the big problem is that the sport is too expensive, so, I say take the same route DTM took. DTM was also said to be way too expensive once upon a time, and today it's financially a lot more efficient. Best thing is it's extremely entertaining (at least to me).
You'd expect that the big-wigs at F1 would've found out a way to do the same, but on so many occasions have they proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are utterly incompetent at running F1.

Maybe the solution is what's already happening: GPWC...

GPWC won't make the series more entertaining, especially if it is manufacturer oriented....

[dcsbeemer]

Maybe so, though should I choose between a dictator-run F1 and a potentially more exciting GPWC, I'd opt for GPWC anyday of the week...

[MrKipling]

Bring back mechanical grip! That's the best way to make F1 interesting, that way when the cars start to spin, they won't lose all their grip, making more lines possible and harder racing easier. It will also take away the problem of following another car closely.

That's all they need to do.

[RacingManiac]

Maybe so, though should I choose between a dictator-run F1 and a potentially more exciting GPWC, I'd opt for GPWC anyday of the week...

most series that are extremely competitive, are run with a centralize power with exclusive ability for making rules. F1 is bad because its in the middle ground. Too many people have a say and no one ends up making real decision. Everything is a compromise. Nothing is more competitive than NASCAR, and there are no room for rule discussion in NASCAR....manufacturer backed series is bad because when they have no interest in the marketing potential anymore, they leave, drags down the series with it. Indy 2005 is the clearest illustration of that....You need someone to rule with ironfist in racing to make stable rule, not many long discussion on something no one can reach an agreement on.

[MrKipling]

most series that are extremely competitive, are run with a centralize power with exclusive ability for making rules. F1 is bad because its in the middle ground. Too many people have a say and no one ends up making real decision. Everything is a compromise. Nothing is more competitive than NASCAR, and there are no room for rule discussion in NASCAR....manufacturer backed series is bad because when they have no interest in the marketing potential anymore, they leave, drags down the series with it. Indy 2005 is the clearest illustration of that....You need someone to rule with ironfist in racing to make stable rule, not many long discussion on something no one can reach an agreement on.

Here here.

[dcsbeemer]

Sorry, but I disagree. F1 is currently ruled by 2 burocrats, namely Ecclestone and Mosley. Since they seized the majority of power, F1's been going downhill fast.

That's the biggest problem I think. Ecclestone doesn't give a rat's a$$ about the sport, he just wants as much greenbacks flowing into his account. Mosley? Well, he's just a power-craving socialist who gets a rise out of spiting anyone who doesn't bow down before him.

Support that? Never.

Even if the sport could just be run by someone who knows what it's about (a certain Mr. Prost comes to mind), or perhaps a group of three ex-racers, I'm sure that would go a long way at restoring F1 to it's former glory.

One thing is for sure though: As long as F1 is ruled by Ecclestone (maybe he owns the F1 name, but he sure doesn't own the formula) and Mosley, I'm pretty sure things will get much, much worse before they improve...

[MrKipling]

Stoddy for FIA president!

[Guest]

why not do the a1gp route and make all teams use the same 900 hp cars made by the same company?

[Vaigra]

why not do the a1gp route and make all teams use the same 900 hp cars made by the same company?

Because F1 is a fight between teams and a fight to better their equipment and mechanics, not a world cup, like A1

[forza_autodelta]

For me , f1's hardest fight are in winter , during test days...nothing much on the races

[Piacki_117]

the same rules for every teams, even Ferrari

[RacingManiac]

FYI, both Bernie and Max were ex-racer......not successful ones, but they were in the sport way before they became who they are today. Most ex-racer's outside venture have hardly been successful....Mr. Prost also comes to mind....


In my eyes, even if F1 today is not controlled by those 2, it will not be different. The problem is not who's in charge but what those people in charge can do. And thats not a lot. Under today's governing system in F1, every decision have to go through the stake holders, the teams, and the manufacturer they represents. Since each party have their own interest to uphold, its hard to reach any decision, without it being severely altered to compromise to each’s interest. As a result, any change is usually small and ineffective. F1 today lacks focus, and to bring it in focus a democratic governing body is not the solution. I hate to keep using NASCAR as an example, but it’s commercial, and sporting success is undeniable. NASCAR knows what they want, they want close racing between all competitor, with all the manufacturers involve have a chance at winning. And the way to govern that for them is to keep the sport low tech and therefore a lot less stuff you can mess with. F1 right now is a mess in that sense. The sport pride itself at being the pinnacle of motorsport, with highest technology and whatnot. But at the same time they want close racing. FIA wants to dumb down the formula, but obviously manufacturers don’t, because they will lose their marketing platform as they technical showcase. And as a result every year they are digging away at some obscure area trying and failing at improving the spectacle because no one can just change the sport to make it better, it has to be agreed by everyone. If you follow the GPWC formula, keep the technology up and let car company play by their own rule, eventually one company is going to drive others out because they can spend more and therefore be more competitive, and others will leave and the series dies. You only need to look back to FIA-GT championship before 1998 to see that, as well as the “former” DTM before 1996(curiously by the same car company…hmmm). F1 needs a real dictator, one can say something and it will be final. They can fix their focus at being high tech, keep the fancy stuff in the philosophy when they are writing the rule, but make the rule specific and strict to ensure level playing field. Best team will still win, and if that’s not a Jordan or Minardi today, it won’t be in that version of F1 neither. And manufacturer won’t pull out, because NASCAR is run like that, and car companies still wants in. And the key difference in F1 to keep the cars varies is that all constructor still build their own car, and there are still many solution to the same problems…..

[Matra et Alpine]

dcs, be careful what you ask for.

If you think Bernie and Max are the extremes of capitalism and socialite then you want to wait and see what Ron et al would do.

RacingManiacn, I dont' accept that NASCAR is "more competitive". It is "more equal" by forcing too many regs. Fine for keeping the masses amused for a coupel of hours. But it's not really "racing" as it doenst' include innovation and engineering as part fo teh solution.

[RacingManiac]

They pick their balance and thats what their priority is. Point is the governing body in NASCAR has the absolute say as to what happens in the sport. F1 should discover their priority, and stick with it with the appropreate set of rule, and stick with it. If they want high tech and stuff, then prepare to have someone outdoing the others at a unlimited spending formula, and have masses complain about it. Or else tighten your rule to make for more competitive series. NASCAR and F1 have a critical differece, NASCAR teams don't necessarily make their own cars, while F1 teams does, and by having that difference you will ensure innovation as the rule are only there for people to interpret it, and you are bound to have different solution to one open ended question. The scope may be smaller for a more restraint rule set, but thats price one has to pay to get the "racing" out of it...

[dcsbeemer]

Many interesting viewpoints...

I don't know my fellow carnuts, I still think Bern & Max must be axed, but that's just my belief. There's just too many "oh no, don't worry, these rules count for everyone except you" things that's going on.

Like for instance, I once heard this rumor that every team in F1 has to pay Ferrari for the 'honour' of being able to run in the same formula as them... Uhmmm, WTF???

Then there's the terrible twosome (Bern & Max) taking away pukka slicks in order to slow the cars down. I may be wrong, but doesn't that affect mechanical grip? And as someone already mentioned, take away mechanical grip and it's even more difficult for the cars to overtake eachother. Who ever heard of racingcars using grooved slicks anyway?

Then there's what appeared to me to be the FIA going out of it's way to ensure Ferrari wins the championship. Then the Ferrari-monster grew out of control. Then the FIA went out of it's way to ensure Ferrari DON'T win. Yet, you can bet your bottom dollar that Ferrari still gets the biggest piece of the cake, despite not being #1. These are all just conspiracy theories of course, but I think it goes a long way to explaining why I feel so 'axeful' about Max & Bern.

And I don't want this to be regarded as a personal attack on anyone, but even NASCAR (who's entertainment value must be one of the highest) was recently said to have 'rules written in pencil'...