How do you see the future of rally?

However unrealistic you find it, I believe the sport really can be like that. After all, it worked during the 1990s. I still have the 1992 and 1993 Rally Australia on video tape, and most of what I have suggested is derived from that.

Just because you don't think it's possible, that doesn't mean you get to take responsibility for what I think is possible. I'm not a child who needs to be sheltered from disappointment simply because he set his expectations too high. If the whole house of cards comes crashing down around me because I'm a little too ambitious, the blame won't rest with you.

To be fair, I do love your enthusiasm. I'm not sure about the practicalities of your ideas though.

What is the WRC? Who is it for? What does it want to be, or where should it go?

At the moment the Manufacturers and FiA seem to want different things. If the new promoter is RedBull; what would they like to see?

Personally, I think around 12 events is the limit for the WRC. This isn't F1....so the idea of 16-18-20 events is surely a no no? We have to think of the costs, and the returns, which will be nowhere near F1.

India, Brasil and other new markets need to be looked at - however, if there is no 'culture' or history of Rallying, is it worth going?

The format of events is another issue; most events are still using the 'cloverleaf' format. Is it possible for a few events to ditch this? However, Portugal, Finland, Acropolis & Catalunya have used differing formats and used night stages. Finland is the only event that has abandoned the Sunday - again, something different. Could we, or would we want to see weekday events? As there used to be.


However, until we know what the stakeholders want, it's hard to know what the future is.

No disrespect by me Prisoner as it wasn't my intent to turn the thread negative as I enjoyed your post which is why I responded. There are so many negative people on this board I rarely visit anymore but do keep an eye on this thread as to me it is the most "relevant" thread on this forum. Being fairly new to WRC, I think often of why I can't get my gearhead friends more interested in the sport. Most love racing of all kinds and and we all follow World Superbike, British Superbike, British Touring Car and Aussie V8s together but I have trouble keeping them interested in WRC action. The older ones want to see more technical stories on the cars, engines, transmissions, brakes, service, development, etc. The technology in these cars is incredible and needs to be showcased! I know this has been done in the past and I always found them interesting and feel it is a step needed to "explain" the sport to people. My younger friends want more in-car footage where they can get a sense of the speed of the action, more driver interviews explaining the rivalries, team strategies, history, etc. I can only see this being successful if it is done at a much reduced cost than a full-blown production and see it happening on a more "amateur level" with an "internet WRC TV station" staffed and hosted by passionate people such as many on this board. See what Leo Laporte has done with technology with twit.tv for what I am thinking of. It all boils down to everyone wanting more coverage of all kinds. I think your ideas are all valid but can only happen once the sport begins to prosper once again. My dreams are as "pie-in-the-sky" as yours so I guess we are both out of luck!

since we keep this discussion realistic i want Lazorzzz on the bonnet the cars...

Right on cue, how predictable! You people would be well served around here to remove post counts from the user display to the left of the post as we found on my motorcycle owner's association forum, it really took all the fun out of it for the trolls if they couldn't see their post counts ratcheting up with one useless post after another. But then again, probably just more "pie-in-the-sky". I do hope you realize that for the new/casual user of this forum, N.O.T., with his post-count proudly displayed, stands as an ambassador of your forum. I'll let you decide if that is a good thing or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prisoner Monkeys

Here are a few ideas:

3) Encourage rallies to adopt a longer format - up to 600km, if not longer. Also explore the possibility of different formats: sprint (two days, 200km), standard (three days, 400km) and endurance (four-five days, 600km).

5) Stages should not be used more than once in a rally. If they are to be re-used, then they should be run in reverse on the second pass through. This should be still be kept to a minimum, though.

---

I would love to see this, it's probably top of my wishlist, because I think the cloverleaf format has lead to generic events rather than events that have character and can create a higher profile. (eg, RAC, Safari, Tour de Corse). However with the current rule that a 2 pass reece must be completed in three days this type of route is not possible, and i think that might be part of the reason why, along with the cost, organisers haven't really adopted longer routes. I would like to see this rule relaxed because you'd probably need a week or more to reece a 600km route twice where every stage is unique. But this means there is probably no way you'd realistically fit 16 rallies into a season. In the 1990's when rallies were like this there were normally about 8 rallies making up the championship (or if there was more then teams weren't obliged to compete at each round).

Perhaps one solution would be to have twelve stages in two days (which is possible, because Germany just did it). The first pass over happens on the first day. Then, overnight, the stages are reversed and run again the second day. It should not be difficult to do, because after the first run through, the stages would have a full 24 hours to be reversed. Then, for the third day, rallies could introduce my "30% of the rally is on new roads" idea. This should not be difficult either, since the organisers need to plan the route out in advance.

In the worst-case scenario, day one could be the first pass through, day two could be the new stages, and day three could be the reverse pass through, giving the organisers 48 hours from the first run through to reverse the stages (but if it takes them that long to do it, they really shouldn't be having a rally).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

India, Brasil and other new markets need to be looked at - however, if there is no 'culture' or history of Rallying, is it worth going?

---

There was no "culture" for Formula 1 in India, and yet when Formula 1 went there for the first time last year, the race was sold out, prompting the question of why Formula 1 did not go there sooner. Indians love their motorsport.

Ah, but that's Formula1; a bad comparison to make. Have they even heard of the WRC?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

Ah, but that's Formula1; a bad comparison to make. Have they even heard of the WRC?

---

There is a national championship in India, which was established in 1988 and has been held every year since. It is limited to Group A cars at the moment, and there are only four rounds, but when the FIA was looking at expanding the calendar earlier this year, I believe India was one of the candidate events that was shortlisted - even if South Africa and/or Brazil looked like they were going to go ahead before the plan was scrapped.

So it's not like I'm suggesting establishing an event somewhere like Kazakhstan. Motorsport is popular in India - some local pundits believe it is second only to cricket (or will be soon) - and there is some local infrastructure in place. So it's certainly feasible.

If I read everything here I think it is better to read the first post of this thread again!
http://www.motorsportforums.com/wrc/...tml#post982161