Is handicapping workable?

[Big Tea]

Once again we have the 'one or two teams are too powerful and spoiling the sport' being brought up.

Teams are always going to do the best job they can and those doing the best job will be in front.
FIA tried with cost cap, loss of design facilities, redesign to new regs etc to close the field, but from the off there are two teams head and shoulders in front, and one not in the same class as those below.

Is it possible or desirable to use the same scale used for development limits to actually add minimum weight to the cars? I am not suggesting a race by race adjustment but maybe 3 times a year.

Tail end cars allowed to run a couple Kg below the stated minimum mean weight while the first few have to carry proportional ballast. I know this has been touched on previously, but it was before the graduated computer and tunnel time 'idea'.

[TimW]

I think it would be workable and I am not really against it, but I think they should give the current regulations some time before they start tinkering with it. The delta in tunnel time is quite big, with the last team having 50% more time than the first. Also the cost cap should result in a better distribution of the engineering and mechanising talent over the teams.

For a first year I thing the spread is not too bad, so I am quite hopeful it will converge under the current ruleset. Suprisingly, we also still seem to keep some variation between designs. The top three have the extremes in design, yet still are quite close in performance. I am not disappointed so far.

[Just_a_fan]

In effect, handcapping already exists but it happens via the variation in budgets between the teams. Williams, for example, is handicapped relative to Red Bull, etc., by virtue of having a much smaller budget. Of course, handicapping would need to work in the opposite way.

[Big Tea]

In effect, handcapping already exists but it happens via the variation in budgets between the teams. Williams, for example, is handicapped relative to Red Bull, etc., by virtue of having a much smaller budget. Of course, handicapping would need to work in the opposite way.

But that is reverse handicapping. If they had extra for being poor.... Ah, yesss. That would not work would it

[notsofast]

Instead of handicapping (sounds like punishing) the top teams, how about helping the lowest teams? For example, start the season with a low budget cap. After every race, each team's budget cap is raised based on their finishing position. For example, an extra $10k for each position, i.e., $10k for P1 and $200k for P20. Or, instead of finishing position, perhaps the then current standing in the WDC or WCC, to make it less attractive to game the system in each race.

[Big Tea]

Instead of handicapping (sounds like punishing) the top teams, how about helping the lowest teams? For example, start the season with a low budget cap. After every race, each team's budget cap is raised based on their finishing position. For example, an extra $10k for each position, i.e., $10k for P1 and $200k for P20. Or, instead of finishing position, perhaps the then current standing in the WDC or WCC, to make it less attractive to game the system in each race.

There has to be a 'prize' for success, otherwise it could be seen as just a club into which you put so much money you are a member and get the same back as you would if you did the minimum required to qualify.

The budget cap is really irrelevant to the 'lower teams' as they will not hit it anyway. A possible solution wouls be to allow the 'lower teams' to sell some rights to the top teams in return for either finance or 'in kind' remuneration.

For example Ferrari and HAAS having a sliding scale on engines, and payment in wind tunnel time.

[johnny comelately]

Check out the concession system used in MotoGP

[Big Tea]

Check out the concession system used in MotoGP

Not familiar with it, but did a quick google. Am I correct in thinking it is allowing extra testing time for teams below a set % of the top team? if so, I like it. I also would be happy to se the 'allowance' sellable to a well financed team to bring the lower team up to the cap.

[johnny comelately]

it is successful.
extra engines, more fuel, softer tyres, more testing time, etc
reduced after dry wins
of course not all of these things applicable

[Big Tea]

it is successful.
extra engines, more fuel, softer tyres, more testing time, etc
reduced after dry wins
of course not all of these things applicable

Worth a look at for F1 maybe.

What is it with you Australians, don't you sleep, what ever time I come here you are on. Not so good after lunch though are you

[johnny comelately]

it is successful.
extra engines, more fuel, softer tyres, more testing time, etc
reduced after dry wins
of course not all of these things applicable

Worth a look at for F1 maybe.

What is it with you Australians, don't you sleep, what ever time I come here you are on. Not so good after lunch though are you

LOL
in semi retirement I trade the market
and its all inversely proportional to my sex life

[Big Tea]

it is successful.
extra engines, more fuel, softer tyres, more testing time, etc
reduced after dry wins
of course not all of these things applicable

Worth a look at for F1 maybe.

What is it with you Australians, don't you sleep, what ever time I come here you are on. Not so good after lunch though are you

LOL
in semi retirement I trade the market
and its all inversely proportional to my sex life

Lol. You have an excuse, its still light. I have a guilty conscience (or a wife that snores)

[mzivtins]

British GT run a success penalty system the raises the minimum required pit stop time based on your last performance.

It is a very different formula governed by an always evolving BOP, so this acts as a track-to track BOP (Balance of power) to stop any odd behaviours where a track might favour a certain chassis too much.

I do not think f1 could do this unless it ran endurance style races, 6 hr races for example

[basti313]

I think it would be workable and I am not really against it, but I think they should give the current regulations some time before they start tinkering with it. The delta in tunnel time is quite big, with the last team having 50% more time than the first. Also the cost cap should result in a better distribution of the engineering and mechanising talent over the teams.

I do not think the last one is true. In a team/company like Merc or RedBull you always have more possibilities, visibility and stability. These are big companies with big budgets and many projects like boats (ok... ). On the other hand teams like Aston, Williams or Haas are dead end streets, you can only wait until they fire one of your bosses or hope to get a job at another team if you want to get promoted. So even with cost cap there will be better engineers in today's top teams. These are supported by simply more prep in the years without cost cap.
I think they need the delta in wind tunnel and (cheap!) CFD to compensate the knowledge and quality issue. I am totally agreeing with you, that this needs time.

For a first year I thing the spread is not too bad, so I am quite hopeful it will converge under the current ruleset. Suprisingly, we also still seem to keep some variation between designs. The top three have the extremes in design, yet still are quite close in performance. I am not disappointed so far.

Also agreed. If we look at the race end gaps from F1 to F1.5 in Austria, they are certainly smaller than 2018 and comparable to 2021. For new rules this is good.

[ringo]

Years ago I created a thread on handicapping the KERS output.
I think the FIA needs a relook at this.

The handicap is based on track position. P20 will have the most KERS power available, and P1 will have the least.
P20 will be able to deploy for longer and P1 the least.
There will be a gradual shift of output from P1 downward. So P2 wont have much more than P1. But the midfield runners will have significantly more power than the front runners.

This is a very easy system to implement by race control as it is all electronically governed.

Say for instance P1 will only have 100hp for 30 seconds. While P2 will have 200hp for 45s.