F1 regulations to dumbed down and restrictive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

To be fair to Max, and as identified by Ben, he does have an almost impossible job but one of his own making to a degree.

How do you free up innovation while helping to control costs? How do you promote close racing while not creating a near spec series?

---

It would be easy if you would have the full cooperation of the teams on applying a spending cap.
However this is not possible in such a corporatist, success and money driven environment, cause someone will always try to get one over the others using some dirty tactics.

Money is the root of all evil in F1 at this moment.

To be able to change things in better they need to start making the sport self sustainable. This means that the teams should get at least as much money back as they are pouring into it, and this isn't the case right now.

If they managed this than there will be no more need for sponsors that pay in accordance to your finishing position, which pushes you to the limits, or over them, of the regulations!

This is how I see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

You have to ask yourself what F1 is? Is it an engineering excercise or a sport?

You have teams spending a fortune developing new technologies (*cough*KERS*cough*) just for all the teams to do the same and then end up idenitical again, nobody wins.

I've always thought that F1 cars should be simple beasts at heart, not much aerodynamics, not that much grip, but engines so powerful that if you press the throttle too hard it sends you back in time :s mokin:

---

NA motorsport leagues are doing just that. ;)
Do we need to have a European counterpart to that?

Newey is a twit .

We know it's broken .

I want to hear how he'd fix it all , not hear him whining about how broken it is .

And , I don't give a damn where he'll go after he's finished , until he is done .

He just did the sport a huge dis-service , as one of it's most well-known designers , by saying it's dying .
This sport made him who he is , and he should be a little more respectful of that fact , as he appears as a rat talking about leaving a sinking ship .

Was it a threat or a promise ?


Come up with a plan , Adrian , or shut the hell up .

;) Well said, Bagwan !!!

:dozey: Formula One has been drowning in MONEY and all the players spent every dime.

Max & Bernie showed no regard for the "Sport" concentrating on raking in the CA$H...

It's all been about the "Show" !!!

Now the teams need to refocus... maybe FOTA will show some leadership...
if they don't fall apart pushing selfish agendas.

:s mokin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Newey is a twit .

We know it's broken .

I want to hear how he'd fix it all , not hear him whining about how broken it is .

And , I don't give a damn where he'll go after he's finished , until he is done .

He just did the sport a huge dis-service , as one of it's most well-known designers , by saying it's dying .
This sport made him who he is , and he should be a little more respectful of that fact , as he appears as a rat talking about leaving a sinking ship .

Was it a threat or a promise ?


Come up with a plan , Adrian , or shut the hell up .

---

Agreed

He's part of the Technical Working Group that came up with the rules so what's there to complain about?

The new regs is another challenge to overcome.

Newey threatened to leave F1 before. He's done everything achievable. Go right ahead to America's Cup or whatever, you won't be missed.

The design office has grown over the years. It's a team effort working with aerodynamics and so forth.

What innovation has there been in F1 over the past years? It's come from electronics and aero. That's why I'm in favour of hybrid technology. It's new, fresh and open for different ideas.

Personally I think that the idea to bring back grooveless tyres & the tighter aerodynamic regulations should work well, although it's a shame somewhat as it removes the competitive element. As for KERS, I think that it was introduced at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. Safety issues aside, I support it long-term.

Testing limitations should help to narrow competition but to remove in season testing is silly because it means less ground is covered by both drivers & test-drivers, many of the latter aspiring to be F1 racers. If you ask me, 20,000km of testing is reasonable.

Renault or Williams won Grand Prix titles without the mammoth budgets that Ferrari or McLaren had, & often pioneered smart technology over muscle. Same applies to Lotus or Brabham in their days. It is interesting to remember that Williams' FW14B (1992) was developed with far less money than the MP4-5/6 that McLaren-Honda dished out. Naturally cost-structures vary from constructor to constructor, but the Williams product pioneered technologies that had matured by 1992 (after narrowly missing on the title in 1991) that the big budgets of McLaren or Ferrari were still at pains to catch up on.

Among other things TCS, semi-automatic transmission, active suspension, topped off by Renault-power meant that the (in theory more powerful) Honda engine couldn't compete at the corners & (eventually) the main straight. Renault's R25 & R26 were able to (in the hands of Alonso) end Schumacher's reign at less than what Ferrari or McLaren-Mercedes could cough out of their budgets. It's true that tyre regulations & some bad luck (not least on McLaren's side) aided Renault, but there it is.



If you ask me, narrowing the competition can done by producing paddock regulations that do not required huge budgets but also to ensure that there is more done for the drivers to compete. For example, 10-6-4-3-2-1 pointing will make winning count, & I don't dismiss giving 1pt for FL & 1pt for pole to spice up the show.

The standard front/rear wings (ugly as they are) & limitations on aerodynamic development & testing (& even inseason practice) will probably narrow the competition & separate the 'talented' from the 'not so talented' drivers. In the end, costs may tumble, but in the end competition will only narrow when the stakes justify the risks. I say that the pointing system should be overhaulled to give fewer drivers more points so that they do more fighting.

While people complain about restrictions being too much, they do have a point, and I do agree, it's also a fact that when the gap between the top and bottom team widens up again, people would still complain.

Couldn't agree more! I do not like the direction @ all. F1 has been degenerating for some time. I've realised that it has become another popular sport high-jacked by the money gods & as such I am losing interest faster than an Andrea de cesaris "moment".
Why we have to put up with the dodgy Max & Bernie show is beyond me. Apparently F1 is politically impotent other than these two snake-charmers. I have never bought that they made F1 great as it could always sell itself. I will concede though that thay made it what it is today (expensive crap). On the car side, the constant emasculation of the cars to make them more like an arcade game for the idiot TV gods makes me dry-reach. And for mine, the biggest restriction on "passing" that everyone with an attention span of less than 5 minutes gets in a lather over are outdated tracks & gutless inaction over a long period regarding blocking. I was saddened by the demise of the breakaway group, as it offered hope.

And, as I am getting things off my chest, speaking of wrong directions, why not have expensive things like Aero common, as they are almost totally irrelevant. This would do two things; ensure there is at least some consideration for looks (ask girls if it is important) & place emphasis on creative artwork, which is another market. For the manufacturers that wish to participate they can show their worth in what is under the skin. Getting precious about their presence simply feeds an insatible animal called business that divides sport.