2023 Italian Grand Prix - Monza, Sep 01 - 03

[AR3-GP]

It certainly isn't in the interest of the sport to have dominant periods.

First year of budget cap and there's one team that is the most dominant ever, or at least in over 50 years. I'm not so sure it's a random occurrence, again the same happened with engine tokens and when scrapped everyone caught up to Merc within a few years.

Never made any fairness argument, this is a business AND a sport.

It's not that hard to understand... If you cap my spend I will be forced to spend more time before I catch up to you. In an uncapped environment I could redesign the entire car and copy in-season, in a cap I can't. Meanwhile the leading car will develop a bit slower but still develops plenty.

I have zero interest in your judgement of competence or incompetence of other teams. These arguments are useless at best, and every team said the same when it was their turn to dominate. Furthermore, once again, the engine token nonsense shows it's totally false, there is a way to allow competition that levels off and eventually caps development of the engine. Capping development from day 1 of new rules doesn't work.

Ferrari had unlimited spending between 2009 and 2020 and never won a title. The cost cap isn't the issue.

Respond on the merit not what you think is that I’m thinking. I have no expectation that Ferrari would win a championship if this was changed, they have other problems.

Understood, it is not just a single team with this problem. Freeing the cost cap, at best would just let Mercedes and Ferrari spending 500 million dollars again, to maybe or maybe not catch RB who would also be unshackled. It would then further isolate Alpine, Mclaren, and Aston Martin and this is simply a non-starter. No one will vote for it! I do not see the merits of discussing it.

[dialtone]

Ferrari had unlimited spending between 2009 and 2020 and never won a title. The cost cap isn't the issue.

Respond on the merit not what you think is that I’m thinking. I have no expectation that Ferrari would win a championship if this was changed, they have other problems.

Understood, it is not just a single team with this problem. Freeing the cost cap, at best would just let Mercedes and Ferrari spending 500 million dollars again, to maybe or maybe not catch RB who would also be unshackled. It would then further isolate Alpine, Mclaren, and Aston Martin and this is simply a non-starter. No one will vote for it! I do not see the merits of discussing it.

There's no point discussing anything, we're not FIA or FOM .

Those are 2 extremes though and only managed off of pure spend numbers. Considering engine development is also capped in costs but it clearly ended up having a balanced grid, you could conclude that there is probably a better way to handle a cost capped setup that doesn't hurt competition for the top spot. Off the top of my head:

1) share/open source winning car blueprints at end of the season
2) allow cost cap to have a multi-year variable component, e.g. borrow from future years
3) engines have reliability clauses, could there be a "I effed up the concept bad" clause?
4) have budget cap be dependent on championship position like wind tunnel time is.
5) have budget cap be higher on year 1 of regulation changes and decrease on year 2+.

(and more)

[dans79]

Understood, it is not just a single team with this problem. Freeing the cost cap, at best would just let Mercedes and Ferrari spending 500 million dollars again, to maybe or maybe not catch RB who would also be unshackled. It would then further isolate Alpine, Mclaren, and Aston Martin and this is simply a non-starter. No one will vote for it! I do not see the merits of discussing it.

Motor racing has always been a rich person's sport, even at very low levels, it's still a rich persons sport.

If a team can't afford to compete at the highest levels, maybe they should fold up, so that another team who can afford it can come in and take their place!

[dialtone]

Understood, it is not just a single team with this problem. Freeing the cost cap, at best would just let Mercedes and Ferrari spending 500 million dollars again, to maybe or maybe not catch RB who would also be unshackled. It would then further isolate Alpine, Mclaren, and Aston Martin and this is simply a non-starter. No one will vote for it! I do not see the merits of discussing it.

Motor racing has always been a rich person's sport, even at very low levels, it's still a rich persons sport.

If a team can't afford to compete at the highest levels, maybe they should fold up, so that another team who can afford it can come in and take their place!

I'm not sure I agree but certainly the sport has restricted what they like to compete against.

unlimited budgets, unlimited testing, wind tunnel access, supercomputers and so on aren't part of what they want to compete on.

[dans79]

unlimited budgets, unlimited testing, wind tunnel access, supercomputers and so on aren't part of what they want to compete on.

Thing is even prior to the budget cap everything else above was already limited and monitored.

And now their are concerns about brain drain for the sport as a whole.

[denyall]

F1 should allow unlimited development towards a given ruleset or make it a spec series. It's either an engineering race or a driver's race.

The current middle of the road balance everything approach isn't working and has only produced one competitive season in the last 25 years (give or take a few).

[AR3-GP]

F1 should allow unlimited development towards a given ruleset or make it a spec series. It's either an engineering race or a driver's race.

The current middle of the road balance everything approach isn't working and has only produced one competitive season in the last 25 years (give or take a few).

If one were to recommend someone not stick their finger in an electrical socket yet they insist on doing it anyway, then who were we to judge?

I say that because the teams voted for this.

[denyall]

F1 should allow unlimited development towards a given ruleset or make it a spec series. It's either an engineering race or a driver's race.

The current middle of the road balance everything approach isn't working and has only produced one competitive season in the last 25 years (give or take a few).

If one were to recommend someone not stick their finger in an electrical socket yet they insist on doing it anyway, then who were we to judge?

I say that because the teams voted for this.

The teams have their interests (money) and made the best deal they can. We can (and should) still criticize them for it. I don't have sympathy for the teams, they made their bed. I have sympathy for myself because the race for the win is non-existent and the development is so restricted it's not really that interesting either but for a month in March when all the new cars show up.

[organic]

Acting like things are set in stone in march is ridiculous..

If it wasn't then amr would still be the clear 2nd fastest car and McLaren/Williams would be lapped each race!

That the status quo remains roughly the same is by nature of all of the teams developing to the best of their abilities. I don't remember huge swings in the pecking order across the season.

If anything, due to the tighter pack thanks to the regs and budget cap the competitive order is changing far more than in pre-budget cap. It's just rose tinted glasses and wanting change because you don't like what is happening now

That there is dominance is not good. It's very bad for enjoyment of the sport and for the product F1 itself. But that doesn't necessarily mean that there is failure of the cap etc. Imagine Merc don't commit to zeropods for a year after they already find out that they don't work from the outset. Or the td039 doesn't happen and Ferrari's 2022 and 2023 cars arent sabotaged. Ferrari and Merc messed things up more than anything. That's predominantly why there is dominance not just the budget cap

[chrisc90]

Understood, it is not just a single team with this problem. Freeing the cost cap, at best would just let Mercedes and Ferrari spending 500 million dollars again, to maybe or maybe not catch RB who would also be unshackled. It would then further isolate Alpine, Mclaren, and Aston Martin and this is simply a non-starter. No one will vote for it! I do not see the merits of discussing it.

Motor racing has always been a rich person's sport, even at very low levels, it's still a rich persons sport.

If a team can't afford to compete at the highest levels, maybe they should fold up, so that another team who can afford it can come in and take their place!

I'm not sure I agree but certainly the sport has restricted what they like to compete against.

unlimited budgets, unlimited testing, wind tunnel access, supercomputers and so on aren't part of what they want to compete on.

It has. Racing has always been a rich man’s sport.

I have a friend who races in the British classic touring car cup. When he was doing the Tegiwa Roadsports championship it was about £1500 per race meeting alone - if not more. When you consider you do 1 or 2 15minute races… it’s a massive budget.

Nothing cheap - even at entry level motorsport

[denyall]

Acting like things are set in stone in march is ridiculous..

If it wasn't then amr would still be the clear 2nd fastest car and McLaren/Williams would be lapped each race!

That the status quo remains roughly the same is by nature of all of the teams developing to the best of their abilities. I don't remember huge swings in the pecking order across the season.

If anything, due to the tighter pack thanks to the regs and budget cap the competitive order is changing far more than in pre-budget cap. It's just rose tinted glasses and wanting change because you don't like what is happening now

That there is dominance is not good. It's very bad for enjoyment of the sport and for the product F1 itself. But that doesn't necessarily mean that there is failure of the cap etc. Imagine Merc don't commit to zeropods for a year after they already find out that they don't work from the outset. Or the td039 doesn't happen and Ferrari's 2022 and 2023 cars arent sabotaged. Ferrari and Merc messed things up more than anything. That's predominantly why there is dominance not just the budget cap

If it was a race of P3-P20 I'd agree that the cap is working but unfortunately it isn't.

I didn't think Merc dominance was any better.

[Big Tea]

Motor racing has always been a rich person's sport, even at very low levels, it's still a rich persons sport.

If a team can't afford to compete at the highest levels, maybe they should fold up, so that another team who can afford it can come in and take their place!

I'm not sure I agree but certainly the sport has restricted what they like to compete against.

unlimited budgets, unlimited testing, wind tunnel access, supercomputers and so on aren't part of what they want to compete on.

It has. Racing has always been a rich man’s sport.

I have a friend who races in the British classic touring car cup. When he was doing the Tegiwa Roadsports championship it was about £1500 per race meeting alone - if not more. When you consider you do 1 or 2 15minute races… it’s a massive budget.

Nothing cheap - even at entry level motorsport

Its not just the cost of racing, you have to have time off to race (not easy when you are employed), cover the cost of transport of you and vehicle to tracks at a distance, plus, and as or more important have to be able to get the vehicle back home if it is a mess, and then have the facilities or finance to repair it before the next meet. A driver that does not have concerns of repair cost is always going to win in a 60/40 squabble with someone who knows a repair bill for this can mean missing a race and cleaning out the account. So you could say having plenty of money makes you a better driver.

Edit, Mansell sometimes kipped in in his mothers volvo when hotel costs were high so he was not going to be as sharp as a well rested driver the next day

[TFSA]

And why would that happen ?

More than ever before the onboard data acquisition and parameters to run the power units with very strict operational practice have developed during extended life of engine gearbox etc. That would still exist in onboard system as it does now but with out the ability or need of a team of "strategists" to then massage the technical performance. Just down to driver to sort it out or use the car more sparingly.

Last part is EXACTLY why it would happen.

Drivers are not engineers. In reality, they only understand very little of the car, and rely on a big team of engineers (not just their race engineer - race engineers have other engineers whispering in their ear during the race as well) to control how the car behaves. They also already have a big workload, and you can only present so much information on the tiny steering wheel screen.

It's not gonna work in practice. And even if it was, it certainly isn't gonna improve the entertainment seeing half the cars DNF with either mechanical issues, or because the driver didn't focus for a second because he had to figure out an issue. Even to this day, many teams face reliability issues - how do you honestly expect that to play out by putting everything in the hand of the driver?

This is not the 70s. F1 cars aren't just cars - they're extremely complicated pieces of technology. And you can be certain drivers aren't gonna drive the cars sparingly once the fight is on - it's not in their DNA.

[101FlyingDutchman]

All I see is a team with a race car that isn’t outright the fastest. It’s very close to that most of the time but it does so at incredible efficiency. It’s set up for the race and whispers to its tyres. The predominant feature of F1 racing sadly.
They just nailed the concept.

Spending more is just a red herring. The field is net closer so the cap has been a net win for F1. It’s more sustainable long term with a lower barrier to entry.

My worry is not with F1 as an org nor the cost cap. My worry is that clearly the turbulent wake is increasing with every iteration of these cars in the current regs format, negating what the rules were intended to do in the first place. Following cars more easily and overtaking on track!

[Farnborough]

And why would that happen ?

More than ever before the onboard data acquisition and parameters to run the power units with very strict operational practice have developed during extended life of engine gearbox etc. That would still exist in onboard system as it does now but with out the ability or need of a team of "strategists" to then massage the technical performance. Just down to driver to sort it out or use the car more sparingly.

Last part is EXACTLY why it would happen.

Drivers are not engineers. In reality, they only understand very little of the car, and rely on a big team of engineers (not just their race engineer - race engineers have other engineers whispering in their ear during the race as well) to control how the car behaves. They also already have a big workload, and you can only present so much information on the tiny steering wheel screen.

It's not gonna work in practice. And even if it was, it certainly isn't gonna improve the entertainment seeing half the cars DNF with either mechanical issues, or because the driver didn't focus for a second because he had to figure out an issue. Even to this day, many teams face reliability issues - how do you honestly expect that to play out by putting everything in the hand of the driver?

This is not the 70s. F1 cars aren't just cars - they're extremely complicated pieces of technology. And you can be certain drivers aren't gonna drive the cars sparingly once the fight is on - it's not in their DNA.

No it wouldn't. Many items of control have been handed to the ecu in reducing driver load, gear change, anti stall, error handling (heard drivers report a reduction in power ? ) as ecu senses temp or other out of range, most is handled with software threshold on board any way. The analysis being remote to understand that area of functioning is then fed back from remote portal to ask driver to "slow down" "lift and coast" or use strat X in mode Y etc.

Part of why we see such procession now is that all the drivers can run full bore regardless of any constraints, the races get interesting when a driver has judge just how much he can contain characteristic in tire wear, brake temp etc.

They wouldn't habitually blow up, catch fire or anything of such dramatic outcome though.