To Jost Capito: Regarding the layout of the WRC

[Sulland]

So you take a system that has been working for a long time, and change it. you do this because the organisation that has been running the show for years has not been able to sell the product well enough, and get in a promotor.
Impressive, not!

For a long time Fia has neglected Rally, now they are desperate to make it the new milkcow, when F1 are loosing popularity.

In the process they are killing off the essence of Rally.
For some time they have made all rallies more or less A4, length, concept and so on. The only thing that changes is the thing the wheels meet on the ground; gravel, asphalt or snow.
No freedom left for organizers.

The tech rules used to be made so that private tuners could make and run their own car, and numbers were large.
No freedom for private teams.

The prize for participating is skyrocketing.
These days local drivers can not afford to run their local WRC round. It has become too expensive. Numbers are down, and organizers loose money.
Why;
Fia has put up the price the organizers pay them to be allowed to run a rally.

Result: everyone loose!
If this mismanagemt had happened in a private business, it would had beed bancrupt by now.

We see the same story with IOC doing the Olympics, FIFA doing the World Cup, and others.
The original target of the organisation changes.

Where the target used to be to support the organizers and athletes to do as best they can, it is now to earn as much money as possible.

The old men running these organisations, have never been democratically elected, but got the job by nod of comerades.
They try to sit as long as possible, and suck as much money as possible out of everyone, so their luxury can increase.


Thank you Bernie Ecclestone for leading the way. You have inspired many men!

Rally has always been the ugly duckling of motorsport, not adapting - lets see if it can hold off another attack. But this time it looks grimm!!

The beancounters are starting to get Rally into the same streamlined format as the rest of the circuit racing world.

[Lousada]

But we also have other exeptions, of a more exeptional nature. Sports that really should not appeal to the general public, atleast not as a TV-sport, but does - beqause of a set of circomstanses (that word cant be spelled corectly?. Petter Solberg helped bring rallying not only in the newspapers, but on to the front page. But we have even better examples, and the best one, the sport that really takes off on television in Norway right now, is the extremly not entertaining game of Chess!
Yep - Chess is one of the biggest successes in Norway the last couple of years.
Well... Since the sport is not called Chess-skiing, the answer to the question "WHY THE HELL????!!!" must be something else.
Well, in Magnus Carlsen we have the new world champion in chess. This helps. But the young Mr. Carlsen, tough not completly without a sence of houmor, is what You can describe as an (extremly) introvert person. He is not the person to come out of the TV-screen and touch the audience, to put it mildly.
But, VG, wich is the largest newspaper in Norway, and has the largest internet-site, has taken chess under its wings, and made it to something special. Something that reaches far beyond the viewers this sport really desserves, if You only look at what it really consists of. To men sitting downat a table thinking really hard. And making small movements every half hour or so.
Well, how has Norways largest and most tabloid newspaper made this into a viewing frenzy?
Have they done it by dumbing it down? Showing chess "for the masses" by comenting really simple so everybody should understand?
No!
They have done the complete oposite. They have taken the nerd-factor to elleven!
VGs own commentator is a chess fan, this helps, but the real stroke of genious comes from how they have picked their expert commentator.
(Follow this link to see a picture of him: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Olav_Lahlum)
He is a super nerd, in the best possible meaning of the term, and has a genious level of competence and knowledge.

This is a good post from you, so much truth. To add to this here is an article describing how they are making football ("Soccer") popular in the United States. They do it just the way you state here, playing to the die-hard fans instead of the casual idiots. In the US of course basically everyone is ignorant about football yet they made it happen without changing any rules of the game. WRC promotors should take notes.
http://worldcup.usatoday.com/2014/06...ore-world-cup/

The Major League Soccer started in 1996 from absolutely nothing. Today it has a 90 million tv contract and 20000 spectators on average for each of its 20 clubs. A great achievement for a league that is not in the top10 most important football leagues worldwide.

[Lundefaret]

This is a good post from you, so much truth. To add to this here is an article describing how they are making football ("Soccer") popular in the United States. They do it just the way you state here, playing to the die-hard fans instead of the casual idiots. In the US of course basically everyone is ignorant about football yet they made it happen without changing any rules of the game. WRC promotors should take notes.
http://worldcup.usatoday.com/2014/06...ore-world-cup/

The Major League Soccer started in 1996 from absolutely nothing. Today it has a 90 million tv contract and 20000 spectators on average for each of its 20 clubs. A great achievement for a league that is not in the top10 most important football leagues worldwide.

A very good article!

[dimviii]

read page 70-71 from Capitos interview. Some had a right guess...
http://digital.motorsportmonday.com/...0-86d82eb2141e

[Lundefaret]

Malcolm Wilson has the best idea when it comes to the future of the WRC. Have R5´s with bigger restrictors. (And my say would be limit suspension travel, aerodynamics, and tire widths.)
Almost the same pace, but on 40% of the cost.

That would mean a lot more drivers - and teams, both private and factory - could enter the WRC.
More drivers in competitive cars is far more important than shootouts etc.

Look at Supercars in Rallycross - semi-private teams with spectacular cars, and a lot of drivers. And above all else: MORE POWER THAN GRIP

Ogier would still win, but he could be challenged on a more regular basis from more drivers than Latvala, and a few others on a few other occasions.
A three car, or even a four car team rule where the two best score Championship points, would get more specialists, and more young drivers to get a chance for a drive.

The classes in the WRC should be:
4WD
2WD (R2)
Junior (R2 max 29 years)
Make a seperate TV/Web/ package of also the lower classes (2WD, and Junior combined), to get more audience, and use this as a billboard for the WRC proper.

And build up a strong ERC, to be a real feeder series for both drivers and teams.
Set the total number of events low, maybe 7 rallies. 1 snow, 3 gravel, 3 tarmac.
This way the ERC-teams can do the full series on a sustainable budget, and national level can do most of these events on a "normal" budget, whit out it clashing with to many national events.
Have these classes:
4WD
2WD (R2)
Junior (R2 max 29 years)
And cut the age limit on the Junior ERC deal, call it ERC 2WD and ERC 4WD.

R5 is a big success, and there is already a lot of cars present. If these cheaply could be run as WRC-cars (bigger restrictors), there are a lot of cars out there.
R2 is a big success, with a huge number of cars. Build on that both in the ERC and the WRC.
R3 Maybe more relevant on a national level?

[A FONDO]

More drivers in competitive cars is far more important than shootouts etc.

Look at Supercars in Rallycross - semi-private teams with spectacular cars, and a lot of drivers. And above all else: MORE POWER THAN GRIP

Ogier would still win, but he could be challenged on a more regular basis from more drivers than Latvala, and a few others on a few other occasions.
A three car, or even a four car team rule where the two best score Championship points, would get more specialists, and more young drivers to get a chance for a drive.

Well said, I fully agree

[Doon]

Another issue for the WRC is the class structure.....still!

Can anyone give me a valid reason for having both WRC3 and Junior WRC? The same drivers and cars are currently leading both championships.

Why not have WRC3 as the old PWRC, but only allow 4wd production cars, R4. Then DS3 R3's can be JWRC only.

Better still, why not scrap WRC2, WRC3 etc.... and keep it simple;

WRC
R5
R4
R3
R2
R1

It becomes quite confusing when you explain to the none enthusiast, 'WRC2 consists of R5 cars, which can be RCC, R5, or S2000, but WRC3 consists of R4, R3 and R2 cars, but the R3 cars are also the JWRC cars'.

[Franky]

Can anyone give me a valid reason for having both WRC3 and Junior WRC?

WRC3 no limit on the car make and JWRC is basically a cup championship

[Doon]

WRC3 no limit on the car make and JWRC is basically a cup championship

Yes, but why both when the majority of the WRC3 cars are DS3 R3's that are running in the JWRC. If you look at the championship standing for both, they are very similar, drivers/cars.

[janvanvurpa]

Another issue for the WRC is the class structure.....still!

Can anyone give me a valid reason for having both WRC3 and Junior WRC? The same drivers and cars are currently leading both championships.

Why not have WRC3 as the old PWRC, but only allow 4wd production cars, R4. Then DS3 R3's can be JWRC only.

Better still, why not scrap WRC2, WRC3 etc.... and keep it simple;

WRC
R5
R4
R3
R2
R1

It becomes quite confusing when you explain to the none enthusiast, 'WRC2 consists of R5 cars, which can be RCC, R5, or S2000, but WRC3 consists of R4, R3 and R2 cars, but the R3 cars are also the JWRC cars'.

I consider myself just a bit more informed than a normal schmuck off the street, active in rally as driver for 10 years, manufacturing parts for rally cars for 25..

And I really have no idea what "Dubya Arsey 2" and Dubya Arsey 3, OR R5-R4-R3 whatever..
mean

The morons which cam up with this, probably non participants---are too dumb to think that the name OUGHT to say SOMETHING about what the one car is vs the other car..
"This is a 1300 Gp X car, but that one over there is a 2 liter ___ class one."

R4? What the hell does that tell me? Nothing. How is it different from a R5? Is A R1 the Highest, ya know?
Numbah ONE!
Morons