With almost no rally experience, I dont see any sense of this step. Only big promotion (in first races)...
Printable View
Cheaper season, a lot more seat time, new experiences etc. I don't see why people on this forum are always so negative about everything.
For me it sound like a great change for him and even if he hops back to WRX after one season he is still many experiences richer, so why not?
Nitis has also done some rally events in Latvia and I wouldn't be too surprised if he continues to race more since WRX is becoming so expensive.
Mahonen saying current rallies are too long. I'm sure this will go down well: https://www.motorsport-news.co.uk/ne...eing-too-long/
I can see his point about service to an extent. But he wants more, shorter stages, all based around a population zone with accommodation for the teams, guests etc. You can't have it all.
Wales really did bend the rules about having really many stages with no service inbetween. Although, we still had probably less WRC retirements than in any other rally. Also, the long saturday loop with no service was compensated with just two night stages as the second loop. And like stated in the article, Wales didn't really utilize the service park well enough. And of course the long liaisons, we don't want that either.
All in all, he doesn't say the total length of special stages in a rally should be shortened, and that's what's most important to us.
A few years ago the stages had to be longer, now they want them shorter again.. Rally needed to be brought to the people. Wales and Sweden are now being criticized for having not enough SS mileage compared to the total mileage. Well, they have it because they brought the rally to the people with their stupid super-special-stages (Karlstad and Cholmondely). Maybe it's not so bad Mahonen retires at the end of the year.
Mahonen is one of the biggest jokes there's ever been in the sport. He tried his best to kill the national scene when he was running things in Finland back in the 90's and almost succeed in it. It's no wonder he has said something as idiotic as this (that the current rallies are too long). The less he's involved in any decisions, the better for the sport.
Mahonen just lost vote for Finnish ASN's AKK Motorsport's chairmanship. Current chairman Juhani Pakari stays in the position. Vote was very close, 199-178, which means clearly that the motorsport field in Finland is divided into two camps. From what I've heard, Mahonen would've been the choice for rallying scene - if someone knows more, please tell. I can understand that for Finnish ASN Mahonen would've been understandable choice given his international contacts. I'm not saying I like him, but this isn't a popularity contest.
Considering Evans' article (what Colin Clark probably describes as a work of world class journo!) and things Mahonen brings forth there - it's the difficult question of how to please manufacturers (who pay for this), desirebly bigger light user service park goers (who pay for this) and consideribly big, but not easily growing heavy user special stage goers (who pay for this). We can't have all. We also can't have rallying as per pre-95 because that society isn't here anymore. We can't have more events without giving away something from the old. There's a lot of pressure involved, for decision makers like Mahonen especially. I think we all understand the different sides, but there isn't working standard solution for every event in the current format. My ideal is relatively close to what we have now.
I am really happy that Mahonen will go out. He is/was cancer for rallysport.
Guys, fair enough - I must admit I didn't bother reading the story due to the Mahonen-factor. But yes, I know he's a "rally person" and I can even recall seeing (as a kid though) him co-drive Seppo Mustonen back in the late 80s / early 90s, but I just can't stand him. And that's purely because what happened to the national scene during the time he was in AKK. But that's another discussion altogether...
IMO, there's a lot of room for improvement in the structure of the current WRC rallies. And it's not that I'd like to see them drive days and days without any sleep (á la RAC 1985), but the rallies should (again, in my opinioin) differ more from one another. We could easily keep the total mileage of the season as it is today, but yes, Monte should be longer, Argentina should be longer and then we could squeeze the true sprint rallies like Sweden and Finland to a more compact form. That being said, I totally agree with Hartusvuori that this current model is far from being bad. Let's face it, it could be A LOT worse.
I do absolutely agree with you that rallies should have and be able to hold on to their character. That shouldn't be impossible, but natural. In my opinion that should also raise the public interest - the core of the events anyhow will be the same, special stages rallying and in the end the fastest crew wins.
I don't see how Rally Finland could be any shorter than it is now. But I'd love to have an additional leg driven on Thursday evening on every rally.
Tour de Corse has 10 stages, Rally Finland has 25 stages. Monte and TDC do not have any super specials, Mexico has eight of them. Monte and Wales have night stages. I think that's pushing it as far as the current rules allow.
Why not have the Service Park at a spectator stage (or vice versa). There would be less liaison miles going a long way just to run a short stage. Seemed to work on the recent Rally Australia at Coff"s Harbour...
What about starting up some remote service areas? Not full service, but more than today and enough to provide competitors to make stages a bit more far from SP. Should open up for new stages. Not same, same every year.
Having said that I agree every rally should/could have it´s own exclusive brand in form of lenght, days involved etz. Teemu, though, have a point that todays formula is quite near the ideal.
Mahonen addressed this problem in the article, when the cars are on a long leg with a remote service, the main service park is quiet for a full day.
I would personally love to have longer legs with remote services to get access to a wider selection of stages, but I understand that the service park is important to the business side of rally, and without that there is no rally at all.
https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/1...gier-2018-deal
Let's hope they'll make an announcement soon.
It could... not that I'd voluntarily be making it any shorter, but let's just say for the sake of diversity - if Argentina or Mexico could be extended to five-day "marathons" (that would be the modern day equivalent of Safari) by giving away a day from Finland and another one from Sweden, I'd certainly give it a try. In a way that would also make Sweden and Finland more unique by giving them that sprintesque flavor (something that made them both special back in the day). Who knows, it could easily turn out to be the worst idea ever, but I for one would love to see something like that being tested.
Btw, I think Sweden was a 2-day event in 1987, so it's not a completely new thing.
I wonder how much the service park actually brings in (in terms of revenue) for the businesses that surround the sport. I also wonder if having a single service is harming the sport. For example, would more people attend Rally GB if it had stages across a wider area (e.g, taking in stages in the North East of England and South East of Scotland, as well Wales). We're unlikely to ever see that again, but it would definitely increase the catchment area. Arguably it would also make the event more interesting, which would attract spectators.
Well the City of Jyväskylä just reported that they made 14 million euros of profit from Rally Finland 2017. If the stages and services would be partly elsewhere, the money would also go elsewhere.
Also, it would be very expensive for the teams to move the service trucks elsewhere during the rally. This is not the 90's anymore. You don't fix a rally car with a sledgehammer in the forest while the driver smokes a cigarette.
Still many questions.
Who will be 3rd Ford M-Sport driver?
Who will be WRC2 M-Sport driver? It will be any?
Who will be Škoda squad?
This is the quote that I find worst from Mahonen, that shows that he should never be allowed to poison rallying with his opinions again:
“Today’s rallies should be compact and they need a heart and that heart is the service park, where entertainment is offered. We started this centralised service in Finland because we know the city people, they don’t go to forests, so we build the service for them to enjoy the atmosphere for the rally.”
The popularity of rallying has only fallen overall during the 'ever decreasing circles' era of rallying. Nowadays we have events like Rally GB that have the slight freedom to do something slightly out of the box, to reach out and capture the essence of what rallying was about, and fans are being drawn back in. I thought Rally GB was fantastic this year, but to people like Mahonen, for whom rallying as it once was and somewhat is now is viewed to be too much of an inconvenience, they seem desperate to make rallies uninspiring, copy and paste non-events. Each 'event' purely being a different country to set up their posh lorry park! Utterly pathetic... If you want to rally around a service park, go and hang out with the rallycross boys Mahonen!
about Mads plans for next year
https://rallysportmag.com/privateer-...rg-crossroads/
Just the most essential parts:
Quote:
Father-manager Morten Ostberg has stated there are four alternatives, ranging from a full WRC season, a combination of WRC and WRC2, a combination of selected rallies in WRC and/or WRC2 and Rallycross, and exclusively Rallycross.
The team are in negotiations at the moment, not helped by the delay before the World Motor Sport Council release the 2018 Sporting Regulations, due next week.
Have you thought that maybe there's other factors affecting the popularity of rallying than just the format of the events? The 80's is over and won't return.
Besides, 2017 saw a boost in the popularity of WRC and I'm pretty sure the reason is that it's not anymore just one driver and one team winning.
Again, I would personally love to see longer rallies, but I also understand the financial challenges in that. How did they do it in the 80's then? Well, car industry isn't as wealthy today and having tobacco/alcohol sponsors must have helped as well.
PH Sport
@PH__Sport
11m11 minutes ago
More
We’re very proud to have been chosen by @CitroenRacing to offer a #C3WRC for hire!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DP9EUSiXcAI-9L7.jpg
https://twitter.com/PH__Sport/status/936542747921670144
Lets see if they have more luck than M-Sport to rent these money-pits....
Prior comparable study on economic effects of Rally Finland were done in 2013. Then direct profit to Jyväskylä region were 14,7 m€, in 2017 it was 14,4 m€. I don't know how the study is made and the numbers are quite detailed in my opinion. Still, if Rally Finland and Jyväskylä want an increase in the numbers, some new tricks must be brought forth. Maybe those new tricks are named Esapekka, Teemu, Kalle and Jari.