Is handicapping workable?

[ENGINE TUNER]

No, it is not workable and it should never be implemented

[AR3-GP]

Why bother with all this nonsense. Just use Ballast? For what it's worth, I don't think F1 should resort to this.

[JordanMugen]

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

Around 2016 I suggested the idea of an "FIA power unit" (under different regulations) which would have guaranteed parity with the most powerful power unit under a balance-of-performance, similar to the TOCA power unit (engine) in the BTCC which allows all independents to have a competitive power unit.

This would allow the whole expensive "Red Bull Powertrains" infrastructure to be avoided and would almost certainly have resulted in closer seasons from 2016 to 2020, as it would have solved the problem of Mercedes HPP refusing to supply Red Bull Racing (or other independents) at fair commercial rates despite Red Bull Racing being willing and able to pay on time (unlike Manor Racing who they decided to supply instead, despite Manor Racing being financially insolvent ).

Yet that idea of an FIA power unit with guaranteed competitiveness seemed unpopular with fans (despite how well in works in the BTCC), even though it was less radical than sliding scale KERS, success ballast or any other kind of balance-of-performance!

[ringo]

No, it is not workable and it should never be implemented

Ok. no reason just because engine tuner said so? lol

Sliding scale KERS doesnt need any new hardware outside of a few sensors and some management.
I wanted to avoid ballast which would impact tyre deg and other things.
Currently there is a sliding scale for windtunnel time. Which is more comicated to police and doesnt have a linear relationship with leveling the playing field.

[TimW]

I think the KERS idea is perfectly doable, but I think ballast will also be perfectly fine if you want to increase the show. BUT, since to me a big part of F1 is technical development, I don't like such free benefits for teams doing a sh!tty job. I much prefer systems like the current one where they get development benefits. Tunnel time, test time, maybe even a higher budget cap.

One of the main problems I think is also that some teams simply do not have enough commitment to step up in the order. F1 has become a money making machine, so teams down the order will never quit, performing at a low level becomes acceptable as a business case. Williams are where they belong. It is up to them to turn things around.
They should welcome new teams like Andretti, and let them have a shot. Allow 12 teams on the grid, with no prize money for the last finishing team, and let natural selection do its thing.

[Wil992]

I think the KERS idea is perfectly doable, but I think ballast will also be perfectly fine if you want to increase the show. BUT, since to me a big part of F1 is technical development, I don't like such free benefits for teams doing a sh!tty job. I much prefer systems like the current one where they get development benefits. Tunnel time, test time, maybe even a higher budget cap.

Yep, agree with this.
No problem in theory with equalising things, but for me it’s important on race day that everyone is racing to the same rules, no ballast or pit stop limits etc. level things up off the track, like the nfl draft system aims to do. First pick of better players but on match day it’s still 11 vs 11 (or 50 vs 50 whatever the squad size is).