107% rule

Plus, with the silly in season testing ban, it's more or almost impossible for these teams to catch up with the rest.

 

I agree that the testing ban is "bad" for the sport, but that's a whole other debate.

However, after pre-season testing it appeared that Mclaren had a dog - They threw their (extensive!) resources at the problem and got it fixed. All teams make progress / go backwards as the season unfolds - That's the nature of racing and the rules are the same for everyone.

Again, if you don't have the resources/talent/$ (and luck), don't try and run with the big dogs and make exceptions because they're newbies. Maybe HRT should be allowed to run a larger motor?......[Or, using the Olympic analogy, the slow folk should be allowed to take steroids - It's just not fair!]

Cheers,
Ian

 

So what happens when the front get faster, and it's no longer just HRT in danger?

These are supposedly the best drivers in the world (which I'll grant for the top 6 or so) -- shouldn't they have the ability to pass a slower car? Especially one that will likely only be on the track for 2/3 of the race?

 

"That's racing!" - Hopefully the slow guys also make progress and can get under 107.

If not, tough luck, you don't start. [Although "force majeure" and the stewards should have discretion to allow you in *if* you've got a legitimate case - Massa last year being my example.]

I'll say again, F1 is, and should remain, difficult - Just because you suck shouldn't give you an advantage by being granted extra test sessions/the ability to take steroids and so on.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I think the winning GP2 team should have a chance to become an F1 team. It seems like an existing team would have much more chance of success than a brand new team.

 

I can argue this one both ways;

- Kinda like (most) soccer leagues - You suck, you get demoted - You win, you get promoted. And in fact that was the "traditional" way to go about it - Jordan started his team in F3, moved on to GP2 (or whatever it was back then) and eventually made it to F1.

- OTOH, GP2 is a spec series, and that's a *world* away from being a constructor. Winning in GP2 suggests you've got a "good" team/management etc but in no way implies you can design and build your own car.

Cheers,
Ian

 

How could the winning GP2 team transform itself into a F1 constructor in the space of a few months?

It's almost impossible...

 

Ah, but USF1 .... oh...

 

They already do. The same chance as anyone else. Or are suggesting some sort of subsidized deal? If that's the case who'd be ponying up the huge amount needed to make the jump? The FIA, FOM?

William, one never knows what happens behind the scenes in F1 but at the time the prevailing wisdom was that Max and Bernie were looking to maintain their hold on F1 and that introducing small teams that owed their existence to them would allow them counter the power of FOTA and the big guns.

 

Think of all the rolling doorstops that were not that 'fast' until they were put on a decent team or a decent chassis or a decent engine or a decent team engineer?

Team Honda sucked, Ross Brawn took it over, got Merc engines, and got 'fast' all of a sudden.
Somehow, so did Jensen Button.

Massa did nothing until he got to Ferrari, some say he has done nothing since. Look at all the good #2's at Ferrari, how 'good' could Eddie Irvine have become?
Lots of so-so drivers have been on top teams, only to drive so-so.
Some great drivers have been dumped to lower teams, only to drive so-so.

Brawn had a fast team two years ago, sold out, now they are not so fast, why is that?

MS used to be fast, but not anymore, why is that? Should he even be racing in F1? (honest question) Like Brett Favre, is he tarnishing our memories?

There are sooo many things that go into making a fast team, you can have all the money in the world (Toyota, Honda) and do nothing, or you can be Team Brawn and win it all.

A couple of years ago there was this kid on Toro Rosso that won an improbable race, today he is the reigning WDC.

All I have been arguing is, if a team goes to an event, let them get as much track time as they can get.
Now, if the grid is 24 cars, and 26 or more show up, then I will support 'knock out' qualifying, but there is nothing more important than track time, it may even be more important than money.

 

Again if they don't show up with a car ready to hit the track how far does the FIA have to bend over backwards to accommodate them?
Even if there had been fewer restrictions as to preseason testing its doubtful that HRT could have availed itself of the opportunities.
As best as I remember Honda and Toyota were never as behind schedule as HRT is.

 

That's a good point, as the new rules in F1 don't allow chassis rental anymore.

 

*Theoretically* at least, chassis rental has never been allowed.

You've (in "modern" times at least) always had to design and the build the sucker yourself.

And, in general, that's the case, and Torro Rosso/Super Aguri using last years RBR/Honda respectively was something of a "scandal" in F1.



Cheers,
Ian

 

+1

They should have availed themselves of the 4 hours of FP available to them.

Roughly 50% of the entrants don't participate in the last 10 mins of quali. ~75% don't get the last 25 mins.

Quali is not testing!

Cheers,
Ian

 

If you contend that Q is testing then you have to say that the race is testing as well.
While you learn every time you turn wheels there is a difference between dedicated test sessions and competition.

 

+1 [Although not my contention at all]

But with the daft testing ban, we often see teams using the race as such - If you can keep going, you do......

Exactly and indeed.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Didn't mean to imply that you did.

Again we see how Max's brand of cost reduction is causing teams to go broke

 

I didn't check all the races, but back when this was discussed last year I surveyed a race or two and for those that I checked no team would have been DQ'd.