Bernie cracking up?

From: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73762

In amongst some more head-strong stubborn ranting from Bernie, I was stunned to come across this little gem:

Quote:

---

"I want to see pre-qualifying again. I want 26 people on the grid, of which 16 are competitive."

---

Since I haven't been doing any hard hallucenogenic drugs of late, you will understand my shock at reading a Bernie Ecclestone quote which I.... well.... agree with.

But this begs the question, if, like me and probably most motorsport purists, he wants to see big entry lists with pre-qualifying and 26 car grids, what was his reasoning behind degenerating F1 into a "franchise" system in the mid-90s, with a 12 team limit forcing any prospective entrants to buy their way in, American football/MK Dons style?

I appreciate in practice this limit has never actually being reached, the closest being in 2002 when Toyota joined only for Prost to go bust and send it back to 11, so the limit has never been enforced, but surely its very presence is sending out the wrong message - i.e. that the teams are merely commodoties or franchises with "value" to be bought and sold, rather than mere competitors in a series of motor races?

Does this mean that the 12 team limit is being consigned to the rubbish bin where it belongs? Or, as per the thread title, is Bernie really starting to crack up with this contradiction of himself? I'm guessing the latter.

"I want to see pre-qualifying again. I want 26 people on the grid, of which 16 are competitive."
Which could also be read as "I want to see 10 pointless backmarkers going through the motions."

I'm all for bigger grids, providing a nursery slope for new teams and drivers, but not at the expense of quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

"I want to see pre-qualifying again. I want 26 people on the grid, of which 16 are competitive."
Which could also be read as "I want to see 10 pointless backmarkers going through the motions."

I'm all for bigger grids, providing a nursery slope for new teams and drivers, but not at the expense of quality.

---

If you are talking about more Andrea Modas and Lifes then I'd be inclined to agree with you, but the likes of Scuderia Italia, Rial, AGS, Coloni, AGS, Zakspeed etc. etc. all did F1 more good than harm IMO, yes they were never going to win, or even trouble the points scorers on even a semi-regular basis, but ultimately someone has to be last, as you say it allowed more young drivers into the sport to learn their trade.

I've mentioned in the IndyCar and former Champ Car forums before that the influx of foreign "F1 rejects" into their forms of racing are IMO a direct consequence of the restricting of opportunities in F1. Whereas in the past a Doornbos, Wilson, Viso, Conway, or going a few years further back Castroneves, Kanaan, Junqueira or Franchitti, would have been attempting to qualify for GPs at a lower team and attempting to work their way up, they are now forced to seek pastures new once they have made as much progress in F1 feeder series as they can expect to.

Looking at the best of the racing teams outside of F1, the likes of ART, Arden, iSport, Super Nova, Carlin etc. I don't think any of them would come into F1 and do a bad job. Yes they'd have limited resources and would be near the back, initially at least, and some might fail in the long run, but if they want to give it ago then all power to them I say. But it's impossible in a non-contrived situation for an entire field of cars to be all similarly competitive.

Like in football, teams newly promoted to the Premier League are in all certainty going to struggle against the big boys and probably go back down within two seasons, but at least the opportunity is handed to them, nobody is suggesting making the PL smaller and a "closed shop" for the sake of quality, or if they are they are in the minority.

If the choice is between the 20 cars we have now, or those same 20 cars with six extra cars a little bit slower than the existing backmarkers, I know what I'd choose.

Sod 26, there's room for 30 cars out there surely. The more the merrier! :)

I used to love the oversubscribed days, although pre-qualifying was fast becoming a thing of the past when I first started following the sport. I wouldn't mind an entry limit still being in place if it was limited at a slightly larger number, but it's all largely irrelevant if there aren't more than the current ten teams willing to come and play. Hopefully the new cut-price regs will make that happen.

I do wonder if Bernie's saying all this as a result of Bruno Senna's failure to get an F1 drive this year. He was known to be in favour of the return of the Senna name and, back in the days when there were 26+ cars, three or four of the top F3000 (as was) drivers would graduate almost by right, with maybe a few more joining in later in the season, but it just can't happen these days. GP2 has had a good track record and does indeed boast the only newcomer on the F1 grid this season as a direct graduate, but I doubt Bruno would be kicking his heels if there were a couple more teams on the grid.

BE is a Hoe, and is my pick for "Pimp of the Year" at the 36th anual "Players Ball"

F1 ringmaster Ecclestone: Button could win the world title :confused:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/oth...rld-title.html

[youtube]5NfUOX2jQJU&feature=related[/youtube]

He be kickin' it with his brotha' Knockee
That's two e's for a double dose of Eclestone YO :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V12

If you are talking about more Andrea Modas and Lifes then I'd be inclined to agree with you, but the likes of Scuderia Italia, Rial, AGS, Coloni, AGS, Zakspeed etc. etc. all did F1 more good than harm IMO, yes they were never going to win, or even trouble the points scorers on even a semi-regular basis, but ultimately someone has to be last, as you say it allowed more young drivers into the sport to learn their trade.

I've mentioned in the IndyCar and former Champ Car forums before that the influx of foreign "F1 rejects" into their forms of racing are IMO a direct consequence of the restricting of opportunities in F1. Whereas in the past a Doornbos, Wilson, Viso, Conway, or going a few years further back Castroneves, Kanaan, Junqueira or Franchitti, would have been attempting to qualify for GPs at a lower team and attempting to work their way up, they are now forced to seek pastures new once they have made as much progress in F1 feeder series as they can expect to.

Looking at the best of the racing teams outside of F1, the likes of ART, Arden, iSport, Super Nova, Carlin etc. I don't think any of them would come into F1 and do a bad job. Yes they'd have limited resources and would be near the back, initially at least, and some might fail in the long run, but if they want to give it ago then all power to them I say. But it's impossible in a non-contrived situation for an entire field of cars to be all similarly competitive.

Like in football, teams newly promoted to the Premier League are in all certainty going to struggle against the big boys and probably go back down within two seasons, but at least the opportunity is handed to them, nobody is suggesting making the PL smaller and a "closed shop" for the sake of quality, or if they are they are in the minority.

If the choice is between the 20 cars we have now, or those same 20 cars with six extra cars a little bit slower than the existing backmarkers, I know what I'd choose.

---

You have to give these people a chance. So many people made, and still make, jokes about Minardi and Super Aguri, etc, but if you think about it, Minardi very rarely missed races due to DNQ's. They, and a lot of those other teams you mentioned were great independent racing teams who did very well to get into races and sometimes score points, etc.

You know what though? This budget cap may encourage others to try to make it. I'm all for pre-qualifying coming back if it's worth it. You never know who could spring a surprise given the right circumstances or some tricky weather. Look at Pierluigi Martini in ??Estoril 1992?? or Jean Alesi in Phoenix 1991. Even Barrichello at Silverstone last year. That was a worse car than what the aforementioned pair had lol.

One of the great things about NASCAR is that a lot of independents enter. For example, a 72-year-old almost qualifed for the Daytona 500 a couple of years ago: James Hylton. He was barely a second a lap off pole which wasn't bad considering he beat some guys in their 20s and 30s.

I love the small teams, and them making races and scoring points occasionally is what F1 is all about. That's another reason why the most wins sends out a negative message. I know points will count for the championship, but the idea of a points system is that everyone starts out equal. What's the point for these guys if they know the objective is impossible?

Sure, all Bernie needs is another 10-15 teams to come up with the 48 million entry fee...sounds like Bernie is talking through his pockets again! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inimitablestoo

I do wonder if Bernie's saying all this as a result of Bruno Senna's failure to get an F1 drive this year. He was known to be in favour of the return of the Senna name and, back in the days when there were 26+ cars, three or four of the top F3000 (as was) drivers would graduate almost by right, with maybe a few more joining in later in the season, but it just can't happen these days. GP2 has had a good track record and does indeed boast the only newcomer on the F1 grid this season as a direct graduate, but I doubt Bruno would be kicking his heels if there were a couple more teams on the grid.

---

How about then, and I'm thinking out loud here, allowing the winning team in GP2 to enter F1 with a customer chassis for a year - at cost price without paying the FIA bond?

If they are successful they have the option of continuing to enter in subsequent years as a normal team playing to the standard rules; if they want to drop out after a year then fair enough.

That way there would always be at least one extra team on the grid, and some teams may be encouraged to remain in F1 bulking up the grid numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V12

If you are talking about more Andrea Modas and Lifes then I'd be inclined to agree with you, but the likes of Scuderia Italia, Rial, AGS, Coloni, AGS, Zakspeed etc. etc. all did F1 more good than harm IMO, yes they were never going to win, or even trouble the points scorers on even a semi-regular basis, but ultimately someone has to be last, as you say it allowed more young drivers into the sport to learn their trade.

I've mentioned in the IndyCar and former Champ Car forums before that the influx of foreign "F1 rejects" into their forms of racing are IMO a direct consequence of the restricting of opportunities in F1. Whereas in the past a Doornbos, Wilson, Viso, Conway, or going a few years further back Castroneves, Kanaan, Junqueira or Franchitti, would have been attempting to qualify for GPs at a lower team and attempting to work their way up, they are now forced to seek pastures new once they have made as much progress in F1 feeder series as they can expect to.

Looking at the best of the racing teams outside of F1, the likes of ART, Arden, iSport, Super Nova, Carlin etc. I don't think any of them would come into F1 and do a bad job. Yes they'd have limited resources and would be near the back, initially at least, and some might fail in the long run, but if they want to give it ago then all power to them I say. But it's impossible in a non-contrived situation for an entire field of cars to be all similarly competitive.

Like in football, teams newly promoted to the Premier League are in all certainty going to struggle against the big boys and probably go back down within two seasons, but at least the opportunity is handed to them, nobody is suggesting making the PL smaller and a "closed shop" for the sake of quality, or if they are they are in the minority.

If the choice is between the 20 cars we have now, or those same 20 cars with six extra cars a little bit slower than the existing backmarkers, I know what I'd choose.

---

I generally agree with you. Not many F1 careers were done much good by driving hopeless cars that rarely got through pre-qualifying, or were almost always at the very back of the grid. At least 15-20 years ago there were other high-profile places for those drivers to go, like sportscars or touring cars. Now, sportscar racing, with the greatest respect to it, has become a bit of a dead end, and touring car teams are (and I agree with this) more likely to go for a young driver from a one-make series than an F1 'has-been', not least because it's a cheaper option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazio

BE is a Hoe, and is my pick for "Pimp of the Year" at the 36th anual "Players Ball"

F1 ringmaster Ecclestone: Button could win the world title :confused:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/oth...rld-title.html

[youtube]5NfUOX2jQJU&feature=related[/youtube]

He be kickin' it with his brotha' Knockee
That's two e's for a double dose of Eclestone YO :)

---

You have WAYYY to much time on your hand fella ;)

Any more and I may have to pimp my sig :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woody2goody

You have to give these people a chance. So many people made, and still make, jokes about Minardi and Super Aguri, etc, but if you think about it, Minardi very rarely missed races due to DNQ's. They, and a lot of those other teams you mentioned were great independent racing teams who did very well to get into races and sometimes score points, etc.

You know what though? This budget cap may encourage others to try to make it. I'm all for pre-qualifying coming back if it's worth it. You never know who could spring a surprise given the right circumstances or some tricky weather. Look at Pierluigi Martini in ??Estoril 1992?? or Jean Alesi in Phoenix 1991. Even Barrichello at Silverstone last year. That was a worse car than what the aforementioned pair had lol.

One of the great things about NASCAR is that a lot of independents enter. For example, a 72-year-old almost qualifed for the Daytona 500 a couple of years ago: James Hylton. He was barely a second a lap off pole which wasn't bad considering he beat some guys in their 20s and 30s.

I love the small teams, and them making races and scoring points occasionally is what F1 is all about. That's another reason why the most wins sends out a negative message. I know points will count for the championship, but the idea of a points system is that everyone starts out equal. What's the point for these guys if they know the objective is impossible?

---

To be fair Martini and Alesi's heroics you mention were mostly down to running favourable (in that individual race or session) Pirelli tyres as opposed to the more generally preferable Goodyears, a situation that has been lost to us in with the control-tyre ruling, but I digress...

I agree with the general gist of your post though, a lot of people get too hung up on the "quality" aspect, but as far as I'm concerned your plucky tailenders are just as valid a part of the spectacle as your powerhouse teams and perennial midfielders (now known as "backmarkers" since there's no-one left to be behind them!!)

As I said, as long as they aren't an Andrea Moda style outfit (while I find the stories of backmarkers against the odds somewhat romantic, the story of Perry McCarthy's steering rack seizing through Eau Rouge because they were just using his car as a "spare" for Moreno is kind of taking it too far), and as long as they are willing to face the challenge head-on Williams 1970s style, then bring them on :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V12

To be fair Martini and Alesi's heroics you mention were mostly down to running favourable (in that individual race or session) Pirelli tyres as opposed to the more generally preferable Goodyears, a situation that has been lost to us in with the control-tyre ruling, but I digress...

I agree with the general gist of your post though, a lot of people get too hung up on the "quality" aspect, but as far as I'm concerned your plucky tailenders are just as valid a part of the spectacle as your powerhouse teams and perennial midfielders (now known as "backmarkers" since there's no-one left to be behind them!!)

As I said, as long as they aren't an Andrea Moda style outfit (while I find the stories of backmarkers against the odds somewhat romantic, the story of Perry McCarthy's steering rack seizing through Eau Rouge because they were just using his car as a "spare" for Moreno is kind of taking it too far), and as long as they are willing to face the challenge head-on Williams 1970s style, then bring them on :)

---

In 1991 they had quite good cars in pre-qualifying, I remember Scuderia Italia's JJ Lehto and Pirro being quite quick at some races, and they had to prequalify. But hey if Bernie gets his wish and we have about 30 cars, maybe they could change the rules again, let's decide the world championship based of prequalifying, whoever is the fastest in prequalifying gets "a win", and whoever has most wins, be it in prequali or the actual race will be awarded the world championship. Then surely the drivers will overtake, do summersaults and other "exciting" things.

Terrific idea. Now all that needs to happen is convince some sponsors to throw a ridiculous sum of money to support a fledgling team on the off chance that they will make the race. That's money well spent! :rolleyes:

JMO, but if you pay the fees, produce a car that adheres to the rules, have drivers who have or can get a superlicense, and are within a certain percent of the pole speed, you get to race. Why can't a race accommodate 26-30, or even more cars? Even Monaco.

I believe the most contentious issue with having more than 26 cars at any race was always... not enough room in the pit lane to accommodate all the teams, although I personally never felt that was a real good reason to potentially make teams travel 8000 miles with all their stuff, just so they wouldn't even get to see the starting grid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woody2goody

I'm all for pre-qualifying coming back if it's worth it. You never know who could spring a surprise given the right circumstances or some tricky weather. Look at Pierluigi Martini in ??Estoril 1992?? or Jean Alesi in Phoenix 1991. Even Barrichello at Silverstone last year. That was a worse car than what the aforementioned pair had lol.

---

One of the most notable "prequalifying underdog" achievements was in my mind Johansson's P3 at Estoril in 1989 in an Onyx.

Anyway, in current hi-tech environment I suspect the "good old days" are over. I can't deny the days, where almost anyone could construct a car in their garage and turn up at GP weekends - even if as a total failure - were somewhat likable. Now only "chosen" ones can afford participating in F1 even on a half-decent level and despite all the cost-cutting measures that are likely to be taken, it looks like it will still be difficult to make it into F1. 20 teams and 29 drivers per season getting points like in 1989. I suspect those days will never come back. We are in a new era. Unless... F1 will be a spec-series one day.