When a spectacle becomes a parody of his own

[Phil]

The car you bring to the first race, you use all season, or update every 5 race etc?

So if there happens to be a dominant car at the first race, how does that improve anything if you freeze the cars for 5 races or the season? It’s the token system all over again when Honda made mistakes but couldnt implement them to better their situation. Then you have utter dominance with the guarantee that nothing will change across the freeze duration.

[Big Tea]

The car you bring to the first race, you use all season, or update every 5 race etc?

So if there happens to be a dominant car at the first race, how does that improve anything if you freeze the cars for 5 races or the season? It’s the token system all over again when Honda made mistakes but couldnt implement them to better their situation. Then you have utter dominance with the guarantee that nothing will change across the freeze duration.

Sort of the way its been this last decade or two then

No, it would not help, just clutching at straws for ideas. If you happen to be a merc fan, this last few years has not been bad. Some of the best racing I have seen was between the two merc drivers.

During the Red Bull period, it was less so, and unfortunately during the Ferrari period we all know who would would win if they were capable of making it happen.

I do not see this period as worse than any other, on personal level.

[LeClerc]

F1 is a prototype series which has always meant disparity, even back in the "golden" days.

(Even a spec series is no guarantee for non-disparity btw.)

At least in the past there was often an element of luck, but today engineers can measure and model almost ANY aspect of the car.

Today the only differentiating factor is how much money you are willing to turn into noise. If Liberty Media are serious about improving the show, they will search for a way to divvy up the money for the teams in a way that will level the playing field a bit.

But, this being F1, I don't think they have much of a chance doing that.

[DiogoBrand]

We all saw with the engine tokens what happens when you freeze development. Does anyone miss that?

[LeClerc]

We all saw with the engine tokens what happens when you freeze development. Does anyone miss that?

That was a fine example of how not to do it. It just cements in the existing gap.

[Big Tea]

We all saw with the engine tokens what happens when you freeze development. Does anyone miss that?

I quite agree, but would just point out I did not say freeze development, just when it could be implemented.

[Just_a_fan]

Two words - "success ballast". There, I've said it.

I know, it's the sort of thing that is used in "lesser" series and, yes, it is entirely artificial, anathema to F1 purists etc., but the thing is that it works.

It could be done on a race by race basis or on a season by season basis. I think the season approach would be the better option.

The more points you got last season, the heavier your car is this season. So Mercedes and Ferrari might be carrying 30kg extra next season, RedBull 25kg etc.

The one thing about it is that it can't be got around by clever design work - the car going on to the grid will be min. weight plus fuel plus success ballast. As the cars are all at minimum weight anyway and all use basically the same weight of fuel, the ballast will have an effect. The ballast could just be something as simple as extra fuel - the teams would all have to have larger tanks than are required for the 100kg race fuel. The sensors prevent them burning the ballast portion of the fuel so they don't gain a benefit from carrying it and it will be removed by the FIA and measured at the end of the race to make sure.

Presto - the field is levelled and no in-depth auditing of team finances etc is required - it's all just weight added to the car that did best last time out.

[Edax]

F1 is a prototype series which has always meant disparity, even back in the "golden" days.

(Even a spec series is no guarantee for non-disparity btw.)

At least in the past there was often an element of luck, but today engineers can measure and model almost ANY aspect of the car.

Today the only differentiating factor is how much money you are willing to turn into noise. If Liberty Media are serious about improving the show, they will search for a way to divvy up the money for the teams in a way that will level the playing field a bit.

But, this being F1, I don't think they have much of a chance doing that.

I guess there is no way to prevent dominance. Even in spec series you have dominance, look at F2, F3 etc. if you can’t throw money at developing your car you throw it at developing the team. Getting the car tuned and setup perfectly, getting the best strategy, the best setup etc. In every spec series there are only a few teams who take home the championships.

As a thought experiment. What if we just supply the teams with a standard monocoque, for safety reasons. Let them sort everything else out themselves.

What would be interesting for me. With the modern design methods would all cars quickly converge to a single standard? Or would you get the kind of diversity that you had in the 70’s 80’s. I think the latter might be the case. Especially for the small teams it might be beneficial to not go for an allround car but to specialise on a few tracks on the calendar, a light and nimble car for Monaco and Singapore, or a straightline beast for Monza and Canada.

That could make the competition quite interesting.

[Jolle]

Two words - "success ballast". There, I've said it.

I know, it's the sort of thing that is used in "lesser" series and, yes, it is entirely artificial, anathema to F1 purists etc., but the thing is that it works.

It could be done on a race by race basis or on a season by season basis. I think the season approach would be the better option.

The more points you got last season, the heavier your car is this season. So Mercedes and Ferrari might be carrying 30kg extra next season, RedBull 25kg etc.

The one thing about it is that it can't be got around by clever design work - the car going on to the grid will be min. weight plus fuel plus success ballast. As the cars are all at minimum weight anyway and all use basically the same weight of fuel, the ballast will have an effect. The ballast could just be something as simple as extra fuel - the teams would all have to have larger tanks than are required for the 100kg race fuel. The sensors prevent them burning the ballast portion of the fuel so they don't gain a benefit from carrying it and it will be removed by the FIA and measured at the end of the race to make sure.

Presto - the field is levelled and no in-depth auditing of team finances etc is required - it's all just weight added to the car that did best last time out.

I don't think you know what formula one is.... or even the definition of sport.

Formula one is sport where different manufacturers compete using a single formula. Like any sport, who does the best work, trains the hardest, is the smartest, has the best facilities, etc, wins. simple. Sport isn't about equality. Usain Bolt wins everything because he can run faster then the competition. In real sports it's rewarded if you're faster/better/etc then the rest. that's why in F1 the winners get more from the pot then the rest. If you go to a much more entertainment competition like the NBA, there are ways they try to punish the winning teams or help the loosing teams, for instance, to give them first pick at the drafts. This kills the sport part of the competition.

If you want a drivers championship instead of a manufacturer one, go and watch a spec series or almost spec series like indycar, nascar or f2, or club racing with balances of performance.

At this moment Mercedes wins because they have the best engineers, the best driver team and spend the most money, just like in any other real sport. And period of dominance are part of that, in every sport. And like any sport, it isn't a bad thing. Just imagine if ten years ago they introduced a rule that at the 100m sprint, if you win you have to run 2 m further, it would of killed the sport instantly.

Sport is about equal opportunities because of equal rules, not about equal performance. Rather the opposite, it's about the proofing that one is better then the other.

[strad]

By All Means let's punish success
F1 is supposed to be a meritocracy.
However that merit should not hinge on how much money you can spend. Cap the damn budget.

[notsofast]

If you don't want drivers to go slow, then you need to reward them for going fast. For example, at the end of each lap, give points to the drivers who completed the lap the fastest. Or, give drivers a percentage of the points based on their average speed compared to their qualifying speed. For example, if Hamilton's average speed was 95% of his qualifying speed, then give him 95% of the 25 points for first place. I personally wouldn't care for something like this, but it might be a solution for those who don't like winning a race by going slowly.

[LeClerc]

If you don't want drivers to go slow, then you need to reward them for going fast. For example, at the end of each lap, give points to the drivers who completed the lap the fastest. Or, give drivers a percentage of the points based on their average speed compared to their qualifying speed. For example, if Hamilton's average speed was 95% of his qualifying speed, then give him 95% of the 25 points for first place. I personally wouldn't care for something like this, but it might be a solution for those who don't like winning a race by going slowly.

They are going slow in the race because of the tires.

I would like to see ONE race tire. A tire that could last the race without significant degradation, and no fuel-flow limit and enough fuel capacity to go hell bent for leather for a whole race.

That won't make the slow fast or the fast slow, but at least it would be racing.

[Andres125sx]

Two words - "success ballast". There, I've said it.

I know, it's the sort of thing that is used in "lesser" series and, yes, it is entirely artificial, anathema to F1 purists etc., but the thing is that it works.

It could be done on a race by race basis or on a season by season basis. I think the season approach would be the better option.

The more points you got last season, the heavier your car is this season. So Mercedes and Ferrari might be carrying 30kg extra next season, RedBull 25kg etc.

The one thing about it is that it can't be got around by clever design work - the car going on to the grid will be min. weight plus fuel plus success ballast. As the cars are all at minimum weight anyway and all use basically the same weight of fuel, the ballast will have an effect. The ballast could just be something as simple as extra fuel - the teams would all have to have larger tanks than are required for the 100kg race fuel. The sensors prevent them burning the ballast portion of the fuel so they don't gain a benefit from carrying it and it will be removed by the FIA and measured at the end of the race to make sure.

Presto - the field is levelled and no in-depth auditing of team finances etc is required - it's all just weight added to the car that did best last time out.

I don't think you know what formula one is.... or even the definition of sport.

Formula one is sport where different manufacturers compete using a single formula. Like any sport, who does the best work, trains the hardest, is the smartest, has the best facilities, etc, wins. simple. Sport isn't about equality. Usain Bolt wins everything because he can run faster then the competition. In real sports it's rewarded if you're faster/better/etc then the rest. that's why in F1 the winners get more from the pot then the rest. If you go to a much more entertainment competition like the NBA, there are ways they try to punish the winning teams or help the loosing teams, for instance, to give them first pick at the drafts. This kills the sport part of the competition.

If you want a drivers championship instead of a manufacturer one, go and watch a spec series or almost spec series like indycar, nascar or f2, or club racing with balances of performance.

At this moment Mercedes wins because they have the best engineers, the best driver team and spend the most money, just like in any other real sport. And period of dominance are part of that, in every sport. And like any sport, it isn't a bad thing. Just imagine if ten years ago they introduced a rule that at the 100m sprint, if you win you have to run 2 m further, it would of killed the sport instantly.

Sport is about equal opportunities because of equal rules, not about equal performance. Rather the opposite, it's about the proofing that one is better then the other.

And I don´t think you´re conscious about what F1 is today...

DRS is abut equal opportunities?

Top 10 cars who can´t choose what tire to start with is equal opportunities?



F1 decided some time ago it was needed to make some unfair decisions to prevent its colapse. Those two decisions made the overtaking trend to ARTIFICIALLY increase, so some people now is happy with the show they´ve prepared.

I´m not. To me DRS is the worst decision in F1 history, an unfair decision wich provide an unfair advantage and don´t solve the problem, but only patch it. But people usually applaud it. I´d change DRS with success ballast without even considering

[sosic2121]

I´m not. To me DRS is the worst decision in F1 history, an unfair decision wich provide an unfair advantage and don´t solve the problem, but only patch it.

I share the same view as you do.

Lately there have been just too many wrong decisions. Wide aero cars, narrow city tracks. "They" took the biggest issue of the modern F1 car and exaggerated in order to hype "fastest car in history of F1". Just as fast as cars where without turbo, hybrid and active aero 15 years ago
I really liked KERS. Skillful drivers used it to overtake without being unfair.

2014 Silverstone Vettel and Alonso raced for laps with gap under 0.5s...

[Phil]

They are going slow in the race because of the tires.

I would like to see ONE race tire. A tire that could last the race without significant degradation, and no fuel-flow limit and enough fuel capacity to go hell bent for leather for a whole race.

That won't make the slow fast or the fast slow, but at least it would be racing.

If the rules are the same for everyone, the relative performance difference between the cars will still be the same, if not increase. As a result, you will see the same result, but with bigger gaps between them.

The same sensitive tires you are criticizing at least make most races more interesting because it limits the advantage a team can have over others and adds the strategic value to it. Add bullet proof tires and that goes away and you’ll have processional races where the order at the end will be the same but with less halpening in between. Then the bitching will really hit the roof in topics like these.