| Author | Message | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 319 Registered: 10-2002 |
Matt, a few points (and thanks for respecting my opinion, cause at the end of the day, that's all they are, opinions): - Don't know how the rules would look like, but maybe the top teams are not even given a choice, whether to use a 3rd car not. Maybe it will be mandated by the FIA for the leading teams in the WC. Incentive could be to have an extra car to win the constructor's title. - Whether Massa is good or not is besides the point. He belongs to Ferrari and chances are, that he will be their test driver this year. So it would not surprise me if Ferrari would use him for a 3rd car. However I don't think the 3rd car option will even come into play. If Jordan folds, Eddie Underacheever would start his all American team with Mateschitz money. Something I'd actually like to see as it would promote the sport in the US. - You're quite right about the marketing aspect. I should have mentioned that. But it still kinda makes my point: If nobody cares about/watches F1, then the marketing aspect is gone and the big manufacturers have no reason to stay in F1. So the point remains the same: F1 has to appeal to the masses. - Don't wanna go into the soccer argument (the world outside the US loves it), but what I wanted to say was, that if the masses aren't interested, there will be no sponsors. And no sponsors, no money, and no money no incentive for talented people to participate and hence no titles, wins etc. So if nobody cares about F1, no sponsors will show up, no marketing interests are there, no big carmakers and nobody wants to drive these cars. The drivers will go elsewhere like NASCAR (outch!). - Anyway I do agree with you, that changing the rules to make it appeal to the masses is kinda lame. But I think it is economically necessary. Actually personally I prefer a rule change for the spectacle rather than for say safety (wow, now I'm walking onto thing ice!): As a spectator I'd rather have a good show honestly. When tracks like the new Nuerburgring were built, people (me included) cried over its boring design, they made it so far away from the spectators (to have enough run off area), that it got kinda boring. I think bottom line is how far do you go in your rule changes to keep it entertaining. I have enough fate in Ferrari to not get worried about any of this. The good teams will always find ways to be faster and better. - Making wider tracks is a wonderful idea. It isn't possible in all areas (which is one of the reasons why Imola is going away), but yes, it does make for much better motor sports. In the same direction is the new approach of replacing the kitty litter with run off areas. That way a spin is not the end for that particular car/driver, but just throws him back in the positions. Malaysia and Indy are good examples for a wider track and one with run off areas. That's also why I was really upset about the changes that happened in Hockenheim: This used to be one of the real racetracks where drafting (slip streaming for Europeans) was possible. Now it looks like yet another new Nuerburgring. :-( | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 351 Registered: 3-2001 |
Ken....I do agree that changes in track width would enable more passing. | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 350 Registered: 3-2001 |
Ken....I didn't intend to imply that there are not more exciting race series.....it's just that they are not F1. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 667 Registered: 10-2001 |
I too get frustrated by the 'follow the leader' F1 races we have seen the last few years. How about wider tracks for some passing? It seems to me most courses are so narrow passing is difficult only at the best places and plain impossible on the rest of the track. Say what you will about IRL, Cart and *gasp* NASCAR but as a disinterested spectator, they have better racing than F1 right now. | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 348 Registered: 3-2001 |
Andreas, I respect your opinion, but I do disagree with you on some points. First, I can't imagine what incentive Ferrari would ever have to run a third car, when they are not allowed to implement their technology to provide for the best result for Ferrari? Is it worth it to Ferrari to incur the added expense to provide more wheels in a spec series? I do not think it is. Masa is not that good of a driver. Car racing is not just entertainment. It is an arena where manufacturers are able to showcase their technology and engineering prowess. Do you think Audi has been helped by their domination in the world of WSC? Why is Bently being carried as the only 'factory' team from Volkswagen this year? Marketing Andreas. Not to sound too much like the typical American...but soccer has not, did not, and will not take off in the U.S.. Reason...it is (in the typical American opinion) too boring! You could throw as much sponsor money at it, and it will still never become a popular mainstream sport! Has nothing to do with money. I do agree that in F1, the masses must stay entertained, or ratings go down. But to punish the best, or conversly, to reward the also rans, is not the way to go. F1 is the pinacle of motorsports in the world. If you cannot compete, then get out. To do away with all the 'Buck Rogers' factor, in order to appease the also rans, is reducing the sport to IRL status. Granted, the IRL has some close racing, but they are racing lead barges compared to the F1 cars. To close...if you like F1 racing, then keep it F1. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 312 Registered: 10-2002 |
Actually from what I've heard is, that first the top teams would have the chance to run a third car. So 3 Ferrari and 3 Williams would compensate for the next one lost (Jordan?). IF it comes to that situation. Wouldn't mind seeing three cavalli rampante on the grid, kinda like F1 in the fifties. Who would drive the third Ferrari? Massa perhaps? Squidracing, I don't agree fully with your statement: Pls keep in mind, that all of this is just entertainment, nothing else. If the masses (and the people on this forum incl. myself are probably not representative as we are already biased in a favorable way) don't get excited by F1 and won't attend the races and won't watch the TV shows, then the sponsors have no interest in pouring gazillions of $$$ into the sport. No money, no Buck Rogers and the so called technology pinnacle is gone. So it is not all about being the best team, it is about having the best show in town. Look what happened or rather didn't happen to male soccer in the US: No interest, no money, no grandezza. So it is important that the Mosleys/FIAs and Ecclestones of this world make sure the masses are interested and entertained. Luckily the FIA controls all motor racing (not totally sure whether that is true for the US though) and therefore can (as it did in the past) adjust the rules for the lower series as well so F1 remains king on the hill. | ||
| David Reaburn (Dreaburn)
New member Username: Dreaburn Post Number: 1 Registered: 12-2002 |
The FIA document says "Now that only 10 teams are left, those remaining are obliged by the Concorde Agreement to finance and run 2 extra cars for each additional team which fails to attend an event". So if 1 other team fails, the remaining 9 teams will be running FOUR cars??? Am i reading this right? Seems pretty strange to me when they're trying to cut costs that teams have to double the cars they're running. Not all teams even have 2 test drivers that could fill the cars. I would think that 1 additional car would be plenty. | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 346 Registered: 3-2001 |
F1......the best team wins. Plain and simple. If it's boring, that's because there is no competition, as other teams could not come up with the right package themselves. The simple fact that one team is able to produce a better package than all the others, should not in itself be the reason for change. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 309 Registered: 10-2002 |
Matt, you got it: The fact, that they have to build super engines that also last forever will continue the 'arms race'. Thinking that makes it cheaper or even less high tech is missing the point. Other regulations though will make things a bit easier (standard brakes for example) and are healthy way to keep some struggling end fielders around. In all honesty F1 always was a shoot out of about three teams for the WC, but having all the other 9 teams around makes it IMHO more colorful and interesting. Tim, no I don't think this will reduce the field. If I interpret the rules correctly it will mean, that if your engine blows, you can bring back a new engine, but you'll lose 10 positions on the grid. So we will continue to see full grids (20 at the least), but they might be a mixed bunch. Which leads us to the really interesting aspect of all this: No pit comm via radio, engine restrictions, reduced time to work on the car (from Saturday to Sunday) all means one thing: There will be more chance for failures and breakdowns, hence adding more chances for everybody. That's probably gonna happen. OTOH the best teams will make sure quality control etc will be top and still end up with less failures and continue to be top. Don't get me wrong, I love Schumi and Ferrari, but seeing them loose once in a while will keep the game more interesting. Just my $ 0.02 | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Intermediate Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 1769 Registered: 2-2001 |
Maybe Oldsmobile will build all the engines  | ||
| matt (Matthewmag)
New member Username: Matthewmag Post Number: 11 Registered: 11-2002 |
what amazes me (apart from the 101 other ill thought out ideas) is that the fia thinks it's going to be cheaper for teams to develop an engine that lasts 6 races........ | ||
| Matt Karson (Squidracing)
Member Username: Squidracing Post Number: 345 Registered: 3-2001 |
So....to punish the teams with the best technology, just dumb it down!! Awesome....great way to stifle innovation. F1 will be a spec series. Not to say that the current state of competition is good, but F1 is all about state of the art, innovation, the sexiness of the show..... No interest in a spec series....I'd rather watch MotoGp anyday! | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Intermediate Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 1768 Registered: 2-2001 |
Snore and Ferrari spends like $250M a year on That?!?! I want to see Can Am brought back with gas turbines & UFO technology | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Intermediate Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 2029 Registered: 6-2001 |
With that 6 races 1 engine rule i think the starting grid for 4 out of every 6 races will be like 3 cars. | ||
| BobD (Bobd)
Member Username: Bobd Post Number: 954 Registered: 3-2001 |
I agree, F1 needs some help... they need to be able to pass and get away from the "parade" syndrome. | ||
| john (Johnwto)
New member Username: Johnwto Post Number: 42 Registered: 6-2002 |
f1 is the most boring racing i have ever seen. let's be real | ||
| Randy (Schatten)
Member Username: Schatten Post Number: 590 Registered: 4-2001 |
check out the thread in the Racing & Competion thread for more details. | ||
| Omar (Auraraptor)
Junior Member Username: Auraraptor Post Number: 223 Registered: 9-2002 |
WTF! F1 was always THE series to see the most advanced race cars money could buy. If I wanted oldschool I would watch CART or IRL | ||
| Lou B (Toby91)
Junior Member Username: Toby91 Post Number: 117 Registered: 4-2001 |
Check out the major changes and new F1 rules at www.FIA.com For example: no telemetering between car and pits, no comunication between driver and pits, by 2006 an engine must last 6 (!) races without being touched, all teams must use the same standard wing and brakes, no automatic launch control or gearboxes, etc etc. It sure won't be the best of the best technology race series we have known. Sounds like the IRL. |