Imminent F1 shakeup?

[Cam]

-guilt over doing something just for it's enjoyment and having both the liberty and money to do it. the F1 rulers - both the car guys and the FIA bureaucrats - sound like they feel they need to be doing something altruistic to save the world instead of just racing for the enjoyment of racing. They have neither the intellectual ammunition nor the courage to stand up and say "We do this because it's great fun!"

Agreed, but why? At what point did a "Constructors" competition become a "Engine Manufacturers" competition? Originally, a group of people came together to build a race car (Constructor) and in doing so, they went to suppliers for various parts they could not make themselves, sometimes custom made, sometimes off the shelf. It was up to the Constructor to decide what parts they wanted, including engine. If no one wanted an XYZ engine, bad luck to the Engine Manufacturer.

Now, it seems, the whole world is scared of loosing an Engine Manufacturer. Now, it seems, the whole sport is written around Engine Manufacturers, with Constructors little more than a side issue left to squander with no creative space and no room for imagination.

The art of being able to cobble together parts into a car and go fast is dead. We're left with little more than a few Engine Manufacturers hardballing regulations to fit their needs and wants, while trying to 'strap-on' gimmicks to give the fans want they think, we want.

Maybe they need to stop trying to save the world and worry about their own backyard?

RIP Constructors.

[autogyro]

I agree with cam but I do not think F1 motivation is 'trying to save the world'.
The motivation today is 'trying to sustain media interest in the face of public opinion'.
The latest naive ideas for gimmicks to liven things up will kill the sport if they are not careful.

It is a shame I agree but the 'noise' will not return.
It represents wasted energy and fuel.

The answer is available but not worth talking about yet.
The end of this year will bring things into focus.

[mertol]

They are not doing very well with the public opinion. And there is no such thing as green car. It is all marketing because there are people willing to pay more for a crappy "green" car so they take advantage of them without actually creating a greener car.

[Cam]

Well, after all the boffins got together, this is what we have now.

Here's my review of the Austrian GP.

In a shock, MHPE failed to secure a lockout pole. Instead MHPE got a lockout pole. MHPE got a great start from 10th at the start to challenge the MHPE front runners in the early laps. The race seemed balanced between MHPE and MHPE with MHPE and MHPE eventually taking first and second. MHPE got a great 3rd. MHPE came home 4th after fading. Some engine got forth, while a great performance by MHPE and MHPE to secure 6th and 7th.

[JordanThinks]

Have you ever tried to explain to someone who is not following F1 closely what it is all about? What the rules are and why the cars are the way they are? It can be pretty illuminating - and I think most of the F1 management would benefit from trying (one on one). F1 has become convoluted and contrived.

Just try to explain to someone why the pit wall is telling a driver to back off - it doesn't matter what the justification is, that is the point where you lose them.

Is the solution to this going to be found by putting further details and different numbers into technical regulations for the cars? I don't think so. Regs must allow the cars to be safe first, and then fast, loud and sexy. The regulations used to do all of those things - but I do feel it is pretty clear that the regulations crossed the line and began to fail when the stepped noses showed up. I think the solution is clear and uncomplicated..

So how do you sell F1 to someone?

You can justify it as a sport where the drivers go through un-earthly forces while maintaining control of a hugely complicated machine. People do enjoy motor racing as a human sport - I believe the most exhilarating example of this (at the moment) is MotoGP, but there are many others. But F1 will never have that kind of racing as it is. There is too much ultimate authority resting with the pit wall because they have too much information - information I feel only the driver should know.

The driver is the core of any motor-sport, and he must be totally responsible for the events on track. Not just in controlling the vehicle, but he must be the primary sensory link to the car. He/she must find the time which no-one else could. He/She must make the errors and pay for them. Today, the driver is told exactly when to push and when to slow. When to change early, when to hit the apex. All based on a very impressive technical network of sensors.

The quantity of information transmitted from the cars and (projected on the TV broadcast) might be technically interesting, but it removes all of the mystery which allows a race to turn into an exciting story. Much like having running spoilers from someone who has read the Game of Thrones novels while you are trying to watch the TV series.

The room for error needs to be brought back. Any technical regulation can be worked around and optimised and turned into a predictable, measurable result. Surely making the races less predicable is what everyone is after? The only way to win today is to maintain a monotonous optimum pace, while trying not to be caught out by the timing of your pit stop. The penalties for taking risks to out-drive the competition are too great.

My recommendation, if I could plead with JT and the FIA is simple:
- Eliminate all telemetry to the teams during the race, bar sector times and gps position (updated at a limited rate). A decision on which parameters should be communicated to the stewards for safety reasons must be reached, but this data will not be made available to the teams during the race.

If I had a platform to debate further ideas for regulations, I would also propose:
- Radio communications from the pit wall to the driver should be either eliminated (except for in the pit lane), or limited to a certain total time. Pit boards still allowed. Drivers can communicate all they want, to gain the attention of the stewards and request changes to be made in the pit stop.
- Reduce complexity on the steering wheel. Drivers can change break balance and switch between 2 preset modes (overtake and normal). Drivers select this based on their feelings about their fuel level which is displayed to them.
- My most dubious proposal: Make DRS and energy recovery activate at any time and at the drivers discretion.

Increase dependence on the driver. Make them the center of the sport and allow people to cheer for them. I feel that little needs to change in the sport otherwise. I would perhaps increase the fuel flow limit slightly (along with the size of the fuel tank) to allow the teams to crank the engines up to the rev limit that is already in place.

[sectionate]

The problem is that all of F1 needs to come to 2014, the cars are fine, the broadcasting is not. The tv robs the cars of their speed and makes them sound quieter than a typical family hatchback.

The fans are priced out of spectating because bernie's prices are too high meaning the tracks cannot afford to invest in themselves to improve their offering leading to a continual downward spiral.

No fan content is allowed to be hosted on line, feck all official content is provided. You get the impression f1 thinks the internet is an inconvenience, bernie even said social media is a fad. This is not the way to run a modern business. I mean what is the sense in deleting fan made content? How can attacking your biggest fans be a good thing?

This, I went to the Malaysian GP and the sound conveyed by the TV's is totally different to the sound on the track.

[natehall]

I like your ideas JordanThink - but there is a much simpler method whilst still keeping the amazing data aquisition, increasing the spectacle and the reliance on the driver knowing whats happening..

Limit Pit to Car Radio to two words when the car is not stationary in the pits.. BOX and RETIRE. Also limit what information is displayed on a pit board to Car Infront, car behind, your position and a small message

The driver then has to work out when to push, when to back off, the condition of the tyres, gaps to other cars etc, and if there is some really essential information that they ned to speak to the driver about - he will have to have a longer pit stop as 2.5-4 seconds isnt really long enough to convey information to the driver...

[Kiril Varbanov]

Mr. E at its best, trolling again - http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114607

Back in April he said he wanted larger grid. Today, the domination of Mercedes isn't a problem. I sometimes wonder is he completely out of his mind, or those are the usual politics and smoke curtains...

[Vettel Maggot]

+1 to you JordanThinks - Sums up how I feel too and I too have tried to explain Formula One to people who don't really understand it. When you are describing and explaining things out loud you do realise how stupid some of it sounds and how much of it contradicts the image Formula One likes to portray (conserving fuel and tyres and not driving to the limit).

[Cold Fussion]

Non technical people wont understand technical regulations of any sort, so I don't see why ordinary people not being able to understand things is really an issue. The bigger problem is that the commentators often have no understanding of the technical regulations, and are thus unable to explain any of it in a succinct or event remotely accurate manner (a good example of this was the Eurosport commentary of Le Mans, what a shambles that was from a technical standpoint). The LMP1 regulations are arguably even more complicated, especially the BOP regulations, and no one is suggesting that because normal people don't understand them, the regulations are thus killing LMP1.

[AnthonyG]

Yet, even technical people find it hard to see why we should save-save-save and yet have a sub 2 second pitstop as an ideal.

[Cam]

Technical and laymen alike, struggle to understand the exponential rise in costs and resources - to save a few litres of fuel.

Do more with less, as a whole, I get. Use slightly less from a freakin huge amount more.... well....

[GitanesBlondes]

I think what would be more interesting from an engineering standpoint is if the FIA dusted off the old 3.5L formula from 1989-1991, to see what teams would do in terms of car design. What type of a power unit would they opt for? Would Ferrari build a V12 that revved to 18,000? Or would they even build a V12? Would it be cheaper to dust off the old engine blueprints and rework them for the present day using whatever knowledge has been accumulated over the last 25 years?

[CHT]

I can certainly draw parallel between F1 and jazz music. One on side, you have the guys who are extremely into the technical details, who believe that all these minor bent of notes or little upgrade is going to make the whole of difference. However by doing so, you are also building a very big walls to make it harder to attract new fans because they wont have a clue nor will they be willing to waste too much time trying to understand something that is totally irrelevant to their daily lives.

As a sports that depends solely on sponsorship and TV revenue, its very dangerous for F1 to get overly indulge into technicalities and making a race too complicated, and forget about what the mass audiences are looking for when they watch F1 and more importantly, how to appeal to younger generation.

Here is an article talk about the jazz music which has great resemblance of F1.

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2011-09-14 ... with-jazz/

[Cam]

As a sports that depends solely on sponsorship and TV revenue, its very dangerous for F1 to get overly indulge into technicalities and making a race too complicated, and forget about what the mass audiences are looking for when they watch F1 and more importantly, how to appeal to younger generation.

Back when it was simple, you could hire a track for X amount of dollars. You get enough people to chip in, you can have the track for the day/weekend. Do what you want with it. Easy. That's the fundamental basic principle of a racing series. Teams pay entry fees for that privilege. Have enough teams with enough entry fees and you can go to multiple tracks. Have enough cash left over from paying the tracks and you have winners cheques. Divide winners checks proportionally to all teams - cause it's a pool that every chips into, so everyone draws from.

Incredibly simple. Want to make a few more bucks? Sure, brand your hats and sell them trackside on race day - you keep the cash. Tracks want to make more money - sure, increase ticket sales. Can't afford track? Go elsewhere to cheaper track.

Sport gets popular? TV interested? No probs. Sell rights to broadcast race, money made goes into pool. Pool can then afford better tracks, or higher winners cheques. Simple. No media coverage? No problem. All we need is a couple of go-pros and a streaming account with hosting. Bugger the media licenses, bugger TV, we'll do it in-house and sell the ad space on our website.

In fact, this seems so easy - why don't we start one?! So, a couple of tracks is possible right? Now, we just need some go karts with a v8 strapped on the back. That can't cost much? Stock v8 off the shelf, go kart frame, couple of hours welding. Done. Just need 20 crazy drivers to front up some cash and come racing. Who wouldn't want to see that?

Who's in?

The reason F1 is all too hard? They made it so. Everyone wanted a piece of the pie. An awesome racing series for innovative constructors is possible, can be done cheaply, cutting out basically everyone, leaving the money where it should be - for the sport and the teams. Oh, yeah, no "World Championship" either - the FIA can go jump too.