Should all be equal in F1?
Discussion
With all the reports suggesting engines aren't working: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32688667
and design is lacking: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32684346 is it time to consider making all equal in F1?
Imagine the drivers 'duking it out' on track in the same spec cars, wouldn't that be an exciting prospect?
and design is lacking: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32684346 is it time to consider making all equal in F1?
Imagine the drivers 'duking it out' on track in the same spec cars, wouldn't that be an exciting prospect?
The one thing that I would like to see equalised is cash. Very few real-world projects have virtually unlimited financial resources. Could Manor be as clever as Mercedes if they each had $75 million to spend? Just maybe!
Failing that, then equalising cars through success ballast would definitely spice-up the show for very little cost to the big teams who would quickly realise that continuous development of their cars can be fruitless.
The only trouble is that when the Strategy Group meet this week, they will decide on no changes.
Failing that, then equalising cars through success ballast would definitely spice-up the show for very little cost to the big teams who would quickly realise that continuous development of their cars can be fruitless.
The only trouble is that when the Strategy Group meet this week, they will decide on no changes.
No, it's a competition. But, they should all have an equal share of the money to work with.
If I were in charge I'd divide F1's revenues into three chunks ...
1: Chunk split equally between the teams to provide their development and operating budget.
2: Chunk paid out in prize money awarded for points scored, points being awarded for race wins, pole positions, fastest laps, etc.
3: Chunk retained by F1 for operating and development of F1 as a whole.
If I were in charge I'd divide F1's revenues into three chunks ...
1: Chunk split equally between the teams to provide their development and operating budget.
2: Chunk paid out in prize money awarded for points scored, points being awarded for race wins, pole positions, fastest laps, etc.
3: Chunk retained by F1 for operating and development of F1 as a whole.
Surely a team budget limit is what is required, this should be enforced with a change of regulations to level the playing field again. Then its up to the teams to work within budget. Finance should be split evenly among the teams. They then sort out there own sponsorship and receive extra cash from F1 group from success, positions etc each season. Regarding engines again a development budget is set and a related price is then charged for those non manufacturer teams. This I assume would then shift more focus to the individuals within a team and they results they could bring, both drivers and engineers. On a separate note a focus on mechanical grip rather than any aero downforce that prevents the cars running nose to tail. Surely that's what the fans want to see not just to be pacified with the occasional spark show.
F1 is not just about drivers. It's a constructors championship mainly. What makes it more special than other championships is that the engineers battle it out just as much as drivers do.
I still don't understand why the distribution of money is as it is though. It's clearly unfair and does nothing to maintain the sport and is unhelpful in ensuring new teams can stay.
Maybe there should be an F1 draft like they have for US sports. But not just for drivers, but engineers and everyone else too. With salary caps and set contracts for draftees. Also maybe look at forcing teams to sell components at set costs to anyone, and reintroduce test teams and possibly reduce wind tunnel time.
Budgets for teams is very difficult to manage as they could just outsource everything. It's too easy to work that system.
All of this is complex though. It has to be remembered why many top teams are in this sport, and for them, limiting budgets stops them inovating and removes a reason for them being there.
I still don't understand why the distribution of money is as it is though. It's clearly unfair and does nothing to maintain the sport and is unhelpful in ensuring new teams can stay.
Maybe there should be an F1 draft like they have for US sports. But not just for drivers, but engineers and everyone else too. With salary caps and set contracts for draftees. Also maybe look at forcing teams to sell components at set costs to anyone, and reintroduce test teams and possibly reduce wind tunnel time.
Budgets for teams is very difficult to manage as they could just outsource everything. It's too easy to work that system.
All of this is complex though. It has to be remembered why many top teams are in this sport, and for them, limiting budgets stops them inovating and removes a reason for them being there.
Edited by Matt.. on Monday 11th May 19:17
vxr8mate said:
With all the reports suggesting engines aren't working: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32688667
and design is lacking: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32684346 is it time to consider making all equal in F1?
Imagine the drivers 'duking it out' on track in the same spec cars, wouldn't that be an exciting prospect?
What you wanted was A1 GP. That went well.and design is lacking: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32684346 is it time to consider making all equal in F1?
Imagine the drivers 'duking it out' on track in the same spec cars, wouldn't that be an exciting prospect?
Matt.. said:
F1 is not just about drivers. It's a constructors championship mainly. What makes it more special than other championships is that the engineers battle it out just as much as drivers do.
Come on, you are not really suggesting that you would expect 10 engineers to perform just as well as 100 engineers?You would not expect 11 footballers to perform as well as 110, so why can you not see there is a massive problem. The fact that the 110 engineers are probably Premiership level while the 11 are Northern Conference just magnifies the problem.
To much cash from the top teams is a huge problem that hugely distorts outcomes.
Lewis driving a Manor would be nowhere. Stevens driving a Merc would be way ahead, though maybe not winning.
vxr8mate said:
Imagine the drivers 'duking it out' on track in the same spec cars, wouldn't that be an exciting prospect?
For me F1 should be a competition between teams first (including both the engineering and tactical sides) and a competition between drivers second. It might be interesting to see all the F1 drivers do one race in a spec series, but beyond that it'd hold no interest for me. I've often wondered whether F1 would actually be a better sport if they removed the driver's championship completely.
From a development budget point of view, I think the big problem is that the formula is so restrictive. It used to be that small teams could get to the top just by having one revolutionary idea (mid-mounted engines, using the engine as a stressed element of the chassis, wings, ground effect, etc.) but these days whenever that happens it immediately gets banned so the only way to get more performance is to pour money into thousands of tiny incremental improvements. Of course they do need regulation to keep speeds down and safety up, but the degree to which the designs are restricted is killing the sport, IMO.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 12th May 09:08
kambites said:
From a development budget point of view, I think the big problem is that the formula is so restrictive. It used to be that small teams could get to the top just by having one revolutionary idea (mid-mounted engines, using the engine as a stressed element of the chassis, wings, ground effect, etc.) but these days whenever that happens it immediately gets banned so the only way to get more performance is to pour money into thousands of tiny incremental improvements. Of course they do need regulation to keep speeds down and safety up, but the degree to which the designs are restricted is killing the sport, IMO.
Exactly...the current regs are way too prescriptive and stifle any real innovation.
It's all well and good talking about 'equal' this and 'team' that, but when you see one team running away with a championship (usually because they have innovated - Ferrari, Brawn, Red Bull etc) we hear of dwindling audiences, teams threatening to leave and lack of new teams arriving, all to the detriment of the sport overall.
I want the action on the track, not on a CAD program and at the moment only Ferrari seem to be threatening, but who's to say Merc can't keep them at bay all season.
I want the action on the track, not on a CAD program and at the moment only Ferrari seem to be threatening, but who's to say Merc can't keep them at bay all season.
I used to be a big F1 fan (watched every race on TV, went to the British GP about 5 or 6 years in a row, and also went to the Hungaroring last year) but I've struggled to stay interested over the last couple of years. I don't know what the answer is but I think they definitely need to change something. DC has some ideas here which seem pretty sensible: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32699924
Starting with full tanks of fuel, tyre management, and massively restricting horsepower do not make something that most casual F1 fans want to watch.
Starting with full tanks of fuel, tyre management, and massively restricting horsepower do not make something that most casual F1 fans want to watch.
vxr8mate said:
It's all well and good talking about 'equal' this and 'team' that, but when you see one team running away with a championship (usually because they have innovated - Ferrari, Brawn, Red Bull etc) we hear of dwindling audiences, teams threatening to leave and lack of new teams arriving, all to the detriment of the sport overall.
I want the action on the track, not on a CAD program and at the moment only Ferrari seem to be threatening, but who's to say Merc can't keep them at bay all season.
Merc are winning now not because of any innovation, they are winning because they did a better job of implementing their car.I want the action on the track, not on a CAD program and at the moment only Ferrari seem to be threatening, but who's to say Merc can't keep them at bay all season.
read the regs, there is bugger all room left for any innovation, the PU even more so, everything is specified, the only differences are in implementation, not innovation.
the days of a Colin Chapman'esk breakthrough innovation are long dead.
thegreenhell said:
I think Max Mosley's recent idea deserves some more thought. He proposed an optional cost cap, whereby if you operated within the cost cap you were afforded greater technical freedoms within the regulations.
great in paper, just how the hell would you police it?take McLaren, they downsize the race team (and transfer the staff to ANO division) cut the budget to meet the target, take advantage of the extra's, job done.
I can't take anything from MAX, quite apart from him being morally bankrupt, he is in part responsible for how we got here in the first place.
thegreenhell said:
I think Max Mosley's recent idea deserves some more thought. He proposed an optional cost cap, whereby if you operated within the cost cap you were afforded greater technical freedoms within the regulations.
Nice idea but turns F1 into an accountancy race, teams spend only budget limit less £5, but brakes, suspension etc are created and tested by partner resource at the partners cost for you.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff