Ecclestone wants teams to run three cars
Discussion
Scuffers said:
mikef said:
To combine 2 threads, I'd support this if the third driver had to be female. That would be progress
how?If you don't see female F1 drivers as progress, that's OK. Others do.
mikef said:
Because teams won't currently give one of two drives to a female driver. One of three (possibly with the first two scoring as someone else suggested) would be a different proposition.
If you don't see female F1 drivers as progress, that's OK. Others do.
Do you think that sports should be a meritocracy? The best wins, that sort of thing?If you don't see female F1 drivers as progress, that's OK. Others do.
I came from a job where there were quotas for recruitment, promotion and specialist posts. There was no difference between performance levels: the women were just as likely to be good/adequate/rubbish as men, so I could see the point.
In F1 we have drivers paying for their seats at the moment. That's bad enough. For women to be forced on teams regardless of ability seems to me to be nonsense.
I do find it difficult to see how women trailing at the back of the field is going to help female equality in any way.
If you feel that women can compete at the top level in a physically demanding sport like F1, then OK. But the place to have quotas is in karting, Formula Renault, that sort of thing to allow them to progress. Certainly not at the top level.
mikef said:
To combine 2 threads, I'd support this if the third driver had to be female. That would be progress
What a load of crap. I'm all in favour of the sport embracing female drivers but to stipulate that a driver must be a certain gender is ludicrous. Why not stipulate that the 3rd driver must be black. Makes about as much sense!Jimmm said:
mikef said:
To combine 2 threads, I'd support this if the third driver had to be female. That would be progress
What a load of crap. I'm all in favour of the sport embracing female drivers but to stipulate that a driver must be a certain gender is ludicrous. Why not stipulate that the 3rd driver must be black. Makes about as much sense!I love the fact that despite all the historical evidence supporting the fact that BCE is a master politician, people constantly dismiss his statements as BS. if you ever do get to speak to any team principal, past or present or any BRDC board member, they will tell you that there's always a reason for what he says.
The latest round of cost cuts save little appreciable outlay. Several teams are running tight operations and could well decide to try to find a buyer or more likely fold. And Bernie is clearly correct in his assertions that buying an existing team makes more sense than starting from scratch.
Finally, through the structure of the FOM, BCE has the top teams on his side. We already know from history that RBR are in favour of customer cars. We know that Ron Dennis believes in survival of the fittest and that De Montezemolo is on record in his support of it. Only Toto Wolff has advised caution on this.
The latest round of cost cuts save little appreciable outlay. Several teams are running tight operations and could well decide to try to find a buyer or more likely fold. And Bernie is clearly correct in his assertions that buying an existing team makes more sense than starting from scratch.
Finally, through the structure of the FOM, BCE has the top teams on his side. We already know from history that RBR are in favour of customer cars. We know that Ron Dennis believes in survival of the fittest and that De Montezemolo is on record in his support of it. Only Toto Wolff has advised caution on this.
Chuggaboom said:
Yeah what a great idea.....that will work really well with all the garages built at all the circuits round the world....NOT....doh !
just how many garages do you think most ccts' have?and 8x3 = 24 cars
currently, we have 11x2 = 22 cars
(in the past, we have had up to 36 cars)
jsf said:
In what way is that an unpleasant thing?
I think a lot of fans and watchers already struggle with one-sided races where one team's two drivers finish 40 seconds in front. That excludes fans like you and I who are fairly pragmatic about the whole thing. The visual image of having all 3 steps of the podium filled with one colour/team would be a powerful negative image to a lot of fans. The 3rd step represents the best of the rest and someone to support when one team has dominated. To have all 3 steps and the post-race interview filled with one team would feel one sided. People just want to think their driver has a chance. Quite irrational I know, but sports fans aren't rational!
Indycar does it but it allows the cars and overalls to be sponsored differently which I think counteracts this scenario a bit.
zac510 said:
Indycar does it but it allows the cars and overalls to be sponsored differently which I think counteracts this scenario a bit.
That would be a good idea, albeit Im not sure teams could find 3 sets of sponsors now, and they do like harmony for the image.Given the struggles now, I suppose allowing a 3rd car makes most sense, teams have the facilities and it opes up a seat. You could have the midfield teams with one strong driver, one young talent, and one pay driver if they chose so.
if your going to get cranky about it, how about the third car must be a rookie driver in his (and I did mean his!) 1st or 2nd year in F1?
this way your not going to get 3 former WDC's in the same team, and it would also promote new drivers to F1.
cost wise, it has to be a massive boost, running a 3rd car for the teams POV will be much cheaper than the first 2, yet the seat can be sold for a pay-driver (they may even make a profit on car 3!).
hell, I want to see more cars on track, yesterday at Silverstone you could easily lose 40 cars round there (hell I did a 24 with 80+ cars).
imagine the battles though that kind of field?
this way your not going to get 3 former WDC's in the same team, and it would also promote new drivers to F1.
cost wise, it has to be a massive boost, running a 3rd car for the teams POV will be much cheaper than the first 2, yet the seat can be sold for a pay-driver (they may even make a profit on car 3!).
hell, I want to see more cars on track, yesterday at Silverstone you could easily lose 40 cars round there (hell I did a 24 with 80+ cars).
imagine the battles though that kind of field?
Scuffers said:
if your going to get cranky about it, how about the third car must be a rookie driver in his (and I did mean his!) 1st or 2nd year in F1?
this way your not going to get 3 former WDC's in the same team, and it would also promote new drivers to F1.
Or ban 'test' drivers for three car teams - they have 3 drivers and that's their lot ( though they would be allowed a spare in the event of one of their main 3 drivers being injured/ill etc. )this way your not going to get 3 former WDC's in the same team, and it would also promote new drivers to F1.
For once, I don't think this is a bad idea. A lot of the cost in F1 is developing the car, rather than simply building it. Having 3 cars per team, and less teams, would promote economies of scale.
So if you went from 12 teams x 2 drivers to 8 teams x 3 drivers there would be a lot less overall costs within F1 as a business on car development. The total pot of F1 cash would be split between less teams, which could make it easier for the smaller teams to compete with the bigger teams if the budget was distributed fairly.
I also like the idea of saying the 3rd car has to have a rookie in with, say, less than 2 years of F1 experience. They could laos use the third car as a test bed for new developments, which again should help with reducing testing costs.
So if you went from 12 teams x 2 drivers to 8 teams x 3 drivers there would be a lot less overall costs within F1 as a business on car development. The total pot of F1 cash would be split between less teams, which could make it easier for the smaller teams to compete with the bigger teams if the budget was distributed fairly.
I also like the idea of saying the 3rd car has to have a rookie in with, say, less than 2 years of F1 experience. They could laos use the third car as a test bed for new developments, which again should help with reducing testing costs.
CaptainSensib1e said:
For once, I don't think this is a bad idea. A lot of the cost in F1 is developing the car, rather than simply building it. Having 3 cars per team, and less teams, would promote economies of scale.
So if you went from 12 teams x 2 drivers to 8 teams x 3 drivers there would be a lot less overall costs within F1 as a business on car development. The total pot of F1 cash would be split between less teams, which could make it easier for the smaller teams to compete with the bigger teams if the budget was distributed fairly.
I also like the idea of saying the 3rd car has to have a rookie in with, say, less than 2 years of F1 experience. They could laos use the third car as a test bed for new developments, which again should help with reducing testing costs.
100% with you, only think I would say is I want 12 teams with 3 cars each...So if you went from 12 teams x 2 drivers to 8 teams x 3 drivers there would be a lot less overall costs within F1 as a business on car development. The total pot of F1 cash would be split between less teams, which could make it easier for the smaller teams to compete with the bigger teams if the budget was distributed fairly.
I also like the idea of saying the 3rd car has to have a rookie in with, say, less than 2 years of F1 experience. They could laos use the third car as a test bed for new developments, which again should help with reducing testing costs.
36 cars would actually be more like a grid of cars, Silverstones a very big cct to loose 22 cars round.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff