'Killing of'. Evolution in Motorsports

In reaction on the death of CanAm and Formula 1 legend Teddy Mayer, posts accused a certain person or a Manufacturer to be responsible for the killing of a certain Racing Series. In this case; the CanAm. I'm convinced that no brand or individual person can be convicted for the demise of a Motorsport class (one exeption, I'll come to him later)
Autoracing is a Sport where, if the Governing body allows, Innovation is a substantial part of it. It is, and has always been, the pure essence of Motorsport. Many decades ago (and in lesser sence today) the great Races Worldwide, like the Daytona 500, Indianapolis, Le Mans or Sebring, had the primary goal for Racing to give the participating Brands a Showcase to prove their technical supremacy.
Remember the intense involvement and on Track Battles GM and Ford displayed on the NASCAR Speedways back in the 60's. The well known story of Ford's decision to go to Le Mans. "If we can't buy Ferrari, we'll beat them''.
In any clash, technical novelties and innovation were a major factor in the outcome. Jaguar was the first to use disk brakes on their Racing Cars. Look at you own Car now! BMW was the first to test a Turbo under Racing conditions. Mazda won Le Mans with Rotary engine technoligy. Audi with Diesel Power.
It is just to prove that Automobile evolution and development is part of Racing. In fact, the beating heart of it.

Again, if the Governing body give room for a wide scale of Car and Engine configurations, the best Manufacturer will take the rostrums. In the CanAm Series, Porsche took the best advantages of the regulations. As they had done at Le Mans. Why? The German Brand had the supreme technoligy. Lets be honest, the Germans bring about the best scientists and Technologic experts. Don't forget that the US NASA was formed around a German ex-Nazi; Werner von Braun. He helped the USA to put a man on the moon.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no German but a Dutchy. A Countryman of Arie Luyendijk (2 times Indy Winner)

Back in the 70's, Ferrari had a tough time when many voices plead for the outrulling of their Boxer 12 F.1 engine. A certain Mr. Lauda won too many races. Peanuts in comparison to what Senna or Schumacher achieved in later years.
Just another example of how Press and public opinion react on a certain situation.

One other item to mention. With all respect, US Automakers have too long focussed on the demand of their clients. producing Ill handling, bad roadgoing, swerving vehicles. And, actualy proved, too much Petrol consuming Cars. Sorry to say, Japanese and German Cars outgunned the best of GM, Ford and Chrysler. Carsales have dropped down Globaly. But even in these critical times, the US Automakers take the worst of the impact.

Sorry to say (I love exeptional US cars like the Corvette or Viper) American Mfg's stayed too long on their own stand. No feeling with the Global development of Automaking and not inough innovation.
I quit interrest in NASCAR (been to many races and Racing shops) when Toyota got a hold in the Sprint Cup. Another example of the decline of US (formerly established) Motorracing scene.

Dear readers and Racing friends. I've tried to make my point clear. To put the story in a few sentences;
Motorsport is an exibition scene for Brands to show their latest developments.
Only regulations can temper the supremacy of a certain Make, like NASCAR does for more than a half decade.
No single man can be made resposible for the killing of one Racing Series.

One exeption. Bernard Ecclestone.
This grey haired dwarf may be admired for his accomplishments to F.1.
At what costs? He can be made resposible for the killing of the European, later World, Touring Car Series. The demise of the Group C Enduro WC series.
Taking the well established German Production Car series to Global status.
Next to hang it on Gallup's pole before it even started up.
All actions to prevent these huge populair Series to become too populair and take away media interest from his Baby love: Formula 1.
He is, and will be, the supreme dictator of the FIA. Nowadays hidden behind his long time friend and actual President Max Mosley. A lawyer and son of the late WW2 UK Facist leader Oswald Mosley.

Dear readers. Excuses for my limited English knowledge. Nevertheless, enough stuff to react. I'm looking forward to it.

Kodiak

I have always felt that way about Bernie, a dictator he sure is.

What F1 needs now is CHANGE, OBAMA-like change :) . I've never liked the way Bernie does his business, he is very selfish. He doesn't even consider the opinion of fans, believing there are always news ones to have at the expense of long time die-hards.
I wish Paul Stoddart was still in the sport, he was always having some beef with Max and Bernie, F1 needs that right now.

Eclestone...Deadman

Mosely.....Why did you have to bring up the Nazi Crap :rolleyes:
You had me up untill that point!
Not that I have any inside information. But I'd be willing to bet that Tazio Nouvalari was on good terms with "il duce"
Which has nothing to do with the state of affairs today.
And just for that I am not offering you an invitation to join "The Sensible Seven" ;) :laugh:

Dear 'Tazio'

I intentionaly mentioned the heritage of Max Mosley to underline his questionable reputation. Recent rumours going round during the 2008 Monaco GP about his behaviour in private life (by coincidence had something to do with Nazi crap partys, according to media rumours) did not do him any good either. As an apprentice of Bernie he carries a certain bad aura.
Any other link to 'Nazi' is absolutely out of the question. I've no other intention than to pick my words in conjunction to the related text.
Subjective it may be.

Kodiak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kodiak

Dear 'Tazio'

I intentionaly mentioned the heritage of Max Mosley to underline his questionable reputation. Recent rumours going round during the 2008 Monaco GP about his behaviour in private life (by coincidence had something to do with Nazi crap partys, according to media rumours) did not do him any good either. As an apprentice of Bernie he carries a certain bad aura.
Any other link to 'Nazi' is absolutely out of the question. I've no other intention than to pick my words in conjunction to the related text.
Subjective it may be.
Kodiak

---

It was also dispelled in court in which Max won a civil case involving that exact subject matter!
That makes you last statement libelous?

y i oughta’ %^%(#$#@#%^$#$%^
And then give you a little %^$#$**(%^$%^&)(*&*^%()_)@
Peace bro!

With his ridiculous ideas today (medals), Bernie might kill F1 as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazio

It was also dispelled in court in which Max won a civil case involving that exact subject matter!
That makes you last statement libelous?

y i oughta’ %^%(#$#@#%^$#$%^
And then give you a little %^$#$**(%^$%^&)(*&*^%()_)@
Peace bro!

---

sorry, but what he won was a breach of privacy case, ruled upon by an old judge who, as well documented, ignored and misconstrued certain evidence of a condenming nature as to the "N-question".

Nothing was proved one way or the other as to whether he was like his parents, a bunch of well documented nazi lovers.

All that was proved, as proudly proclaimed hisself from the witness chair, that he was a pervert into S and M, being such for many years, loving to inflict pain and such on others.... :rolleyes: demonstrating all the great character traits one would expect of the president of the FIA and from being a running buddy of bernie, who accepted a 300 million dollar gift from bernie for being such a good friend......loved bernie's christmas card by the way

Leaving aside Max Mosley's private life because at the end of the day that's what it is, basically motor racing comes in three forms that sometimes overlap.

(1) A group of enthusiasts simply wanting to race their cars. Essentially amateur racing. The circuit owners even if they are enthusiasts will want to break even. So they charge admission to defray expenses and it starts to become professional. Examples: The original Targa Florio, 500cc racing immediately post WW2 - once Cooper started selling cars the amateur special builders were squeezed out, in the US sports car racing sanctioned by the SCCA and USAC was originally amateur but eventually turned professional, club racing the world over.

(2) Racing as a competition between manufacturers who are prepared to spend money to publicise their cars: Examples: The Gordon Bennett races, the original Grand Prix, Le Mans, Mille Miglia and most European professional racing

(3) Racing run as an entertainment for the profit of the organisers. Examples; Barney Oldfield at the US state fair grounds running what were essentially 'exhibition races', US midgets, US sprint cars, Indianapolis, NASCAR

Grand Prix Racing was a mix of all types. Did Ferrari race to sell road going sports cars or did he sell the road cars and racing sports cars to fund his racing? Maserati sold racing cars and reluctantly ran a works team to sell cars. Mercedes Benz raced to sell road cars. Cooper, Lotus, Brabham andMarch both sold racing cars and raced to make a profit. McLaren and Frank Williams only raced in GPs and did so to make a living. But all were basically enthusiasts.

Along came Bernie Ecclestone a mix of enthusiast and entrepreneur. He raced in Formula 3 and in stock cars. He was a friend of Stuart Lewis Evans and acted as his manager. Later he purchased the Brabham Team primarily as a business venture. He realised that there was potential to make a greater profit if the teams acted together so he developed FOCA and gradually moved the sport onto a professional footing. Instead of individual teams negotiating with individual organisers he moved things towards FOCA negotiating with the race organisers. This led to FOCA guaranteeing a full field at all races. Gradually the power of FOCA increased, eg Ecclestone negotiated the TV rights. Slowly Grand Prix racing turned into an organised spectacle, the teams didn't mind as they were making money. Take Eddie Jordan who hardly won a race but still made enough for a millionnaire lifestyle.

This has been at the expense of the lower formulae. Who will want to go and watch a club meeting or a national metting watching F3, F2, Formula Ford, sports cars, etc when he can see the much hyped Formula 1 on TV every second weekend? Motor racing as a sport for enthusiasts both as participants and as spectators has been strangled.

In the USA, CART and IRL have gradually lost support and open wheel racing, including the Indianapolis 500 now plays second fiddle to the NASCAR circus. NASCAR itself is no longer a contest between the big US makers: Ford, Chevrolet, Pontiac, etc the cars are now all the same and somewhere under all the sponsorship they are badged with a car maker's name. Sadly, Formula 1 is going the same way with the regulations leading more and more towards almost identical cars.

Honda have pulled out. How long before Toyota, Renault, BMW and Mercedes-Benz follow them? After all in any given year even if one wins the championship and can capitalise on it there will be three who can't.

Yes, Bernie Ecclestone has transformed 'Formula 1' into a cash cow, but he has been allowed to do so by those who are sharing in the profits. It is wrong to blame just him or him and Max Mosley the fault lies with all those who effectively sold out their principles to him.

Bernie Ecclestone is a very astute business man and has made a huge amount of money from his racing-related ventures, but like any business man he is well aware that you can only sell when people are willing to buy. As such is it Mr Ecclestones fault as to where F1 is today or is it the "fans" fault, after all its ultimately their money thats in question here.
Personally i think that the public have many many other motor racing spectacles to witness if they have issues with F1, and if there is demand to see such things then there will be money to be made and a new "suit" will market it for us.
So if you dont liek what Bernie has done to F1, then dont blame Bernie, blame yourselves for buying his product!

Now, the Can-Am question, did Porsche Kill it?
I dont think Porsche can be blamed for expoiting the regulations to their fullest and thus rendering all other marques obsolete! Dont blame porsche, blame the rule makers for allowing it!

Great posts D-type (oooh, I love Jags) and Blito.
In general, I underline these opinions. Off course, In every commercial branche, and Motorsport is no exeption, it's always the game of supply and demand. Be it in NASCAR or F.1. Market your product as good as posible and sales will come. One, not to underestimate factor must be taken in account; every year, a new, young, generation discovers the 'hype' of the product. This can only be achieved by the one and only primairy factor: media.
As a 'salesman' of a product, media attention is the best you can get (for example the Rocketing grow of Vodafone and Red Bull). But what if this way of advertisement is in the hands of one person or governing body? As is since long the case in Motorsports. Then we have the unconfertable and unwanted situation of Monopoly position. That's the problem with Mr. Ecclestone. I do agree. Before he took over in F.1 and formed the FOCA, Live in F.1 was a mess. Miles long are the examples of National Automobile clubs, hosting a F.1 race, not supplying a decent organisation. Sometimes running of with the revenues. These were the days of the FIA predecessor: the CSI. One of the most gruelling examples was the 1973 Dutch GP. For the first time televised nationwide exept for: the race direction at the Zandvoort Track. They were not connected and had no clue what happened to poor Roger Williamson who burned alive in his car, despite the rescuing efforts of his friend David Purley.
As a Dutchy I will never forget these horrible scenes. And many senior English readers do remember this tragic day. After Bernie took over, F.1 has become a lot more organised and saver. My credits for that. But, as I stated in my early post, As president of FOCA and most influential person in the FIA, he controls too much. F.1 is his one and only primary. To the sacrifice of all other Racing. On this level, we, as paying visitors, hobby racers, Drivers in, not equal promoted, divisions, are not getting the rightfull media attention.
As long as Mr. Ecclestone acts like a Tycoon (as once Randolph Hurst in the US), he cannot be considered as the primary representative of Motorsport Worldwide. As a senior Racing fan, I've seen too many great and historical events been sacrificed to the utmost glory of F.1. Even a, once most respected, UK Motorsport Magazine 'Autosport' switched it's general vieuw primarily to F.1, in the early 90's. The Power of Popularity, Influence, Commercial consideration? Who knows? During the 90's many F.1 Magazines have popped up in the bookshells. It is this depressing attention for one Racing series, basing my aversion.
Yes, if whe all take in account of to what sacrifices F.1 got to a Blooming Bussines, whe would think twice. Unfortunately, the younger generations do not know about this part of history. I think it is our opportunity, we Motorsport fans with kwnoledge of the past, Hobby racers, to bring up for discussion this part of History.

Kodiak

I almost think this thread would be best off in 'Chit Chat', because it's worth discussing a variety of motorsports in it.

I have come to think that while innovation and the onward march of development in motorsport are great in themselves, they have often been detrimental to the sporting element, and even to the continued long-term existence of those sports. Take rallying as an example. Some, I know, feel that Lancia started to take it away from its essence of being a competition between versions of existing production models when it introduced the Stratos, but I think the arrival of four-wheel-drive with the Audi Quattro is probably the more important 'milestone'. There followed directly the Group B 'supercars' which were probably unsustainable on cost grounds and gave the sport a bad name after Henri Toivonen's fatal accident. The adoption of Group A as the primary class in world rallying in 1987 was a good thing, in my view, but again the natural pace of development resumed and costs spiralled, leading to today's crisis in the WRC. In touring cars, the huge amounts of money spent by the Schnitzer BMW team and then Alfa to win the British championship moved the goalposts completely. Alfa's use of wings on the 155, thanks to the team's clever interpretation of the homologation requirements, made it unique at first but the following year everybody had them. The costs of what became Super Touring soon went out of control and it was effectively dead five-six years later.

In the cases of post-Group B rallying and post-Super Touring touring cars, the solution was to cut costs and make the cars less technologically advanced. It worked for a bit — a season, in my opinion — in rallying, and it seems to be working very well in touring cars thanks to Super 2000. S2000 seems to be the solution to some of world rallying's problems, too, but I'm afraid I think that key to its longer-term success in terms of keeping things close and competitive will be a lack of opportunity to interpret the rules in 'clever' ways. This is what Audi was able to do with the Quattro in rallying, and Alfa with the 155 Silverstone in touring cars, and in both cases the floodgates were opened. The inevitable result? Rising costs and falling sustainability.