Is Formula 1 running out of gas?

Lewis has chosen ONCE....it is not like this makes it a schema. If that does apply to one than maybe Fangio but else?

 

The problem is that it doesn't reward the best, it rewards the worst. This isn't supposed to be a handicap league, it is supposed to be the highest form of motor racing. The problem seems to be deciding what the word "highest" means. The FIA has tried to use artificial handicaps and cost caps in order to increase the size of the field. If F1 wants to create a real show, take off the chains and make it a real anything goes series. Make the fastest race car in the world and prove it on the track in a series of 15 races (20 has become too many). Make external dimensions and driver safety the only requirements all the cars must meet. Let the best engine in the best handling car win. Every team is free to design and make their own car...whatever internal combustion engine design and displacement they want, whatever transmission they want, whatever tire/wheels they want, front/mid/rear engine is each team's choice. Do all the testing you want...but the basic design you bring to race one is the basic design you must work with for the season. I leave the rest of the specifics to be filled in by your own fantasies.

 

Quite the opposite. Did you watch Seb the other week from last to fourth? There has been plenty of others do the same. It's more than just racing it's entertainment. Without viewers there would be no racing.
It needs spicing up. Another often mentioned idea would be to have sprinklers on every track. They would come on at random and drivers would have to race in the wet.
In fact some will argue having different cars is unfair. Perhaps they should all drive the same cars and then that would show who the best driver is.. race after race after race.
I want to watch interesting racing with overtaking, I am bored with watching a procession. My ex-missus always wanted to see the parade at Disney but frankly bore the pants off me but at least the floats were interesting!

I think that could stay. You would just go behind the previous race winner.
As mentioned above BTCC did this and it makes for incredible racing to watch

 

Again, reverse grid is ridiculous, what would be the point in qualifying? none! F.1 is about being the fastest guy on track, qualifying is that, showing youa re faster, hence you deserve to start first, anything else is rubbish, it's not racing, i don'rt care if the show is better or not, it's not racing, just like a pace car that joins all the cars together everytime the elader is escaping, it's a afrse, and i'm not interested in that, same as a DRS and all other BS.

 

Drop qualifying - simple.

 

One practice and then run the race - 2 hours on Saturday. Start in the order of finishing the previous GP race, for GP on Sunday. Friday is fan day at the track with demo's/driver meeting of fans and Porsche Super Cup etc. If the previous race had rain or weather issues and had a mixed result, the sort of mixed grid carries to the next race. No need for staged false reverse grids. Performance should dictate the grid.

 

That would be bad! If you drop out the previous race this would mean that you also start from the last place in the next one, so a DNF would affect even more than one race as you need several to recover to the top...If you have a reliable and fast car like the Mercedes is at the moment this would mean that you see 20 start-finish victories of Hamilton in a row in cruise control and all he would need to do is not to make a mistake at the start...

 

No format will please anyone LOL> certainly not here LOL

 

For what it's worth here is a cut down version of the BTCC grid regulation rules...after all it is all about the show

• On Saturday there are two Free Practice sessions of 40 minutes and one Qualifying session of 30 minutes
• On Sunday there are three BTCC races

The points system is 20-17-15-13-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 for the top 15 finishers. This method of scoring is also be applied to independent drivers’ and teams’ championship and the overall teams’ – see full regs for details.

Single bonus points are awarded for the fastest qualifier, fastest laps and leading laps during races.

Race grids

• The grid for race one is decided during Saturday’s qualifying session
• The grid for race two is based on the finishing order of race one
• The grid for race three is based on finishing positions, however there is also a reversed-grid element to the starting order. Numbers representing the cars that finished from sixth to tenth position in race two are put into a bowl, and one number is drawn at random. The corresponding car will start on pole, with the cars that finished ahead of it reversed i.e. if number six is chosen, the car that finished sixth in race two will start from pole ahead of the car that finished fifth, fourth, third etc. The remainder of the grid follows as per the finishing order of race two

Success Ballast

Cars that are successful in the BTCC must carry ballast (additional weight) in their cars. Ballast is given to the top ten runners in the following allocations:

1st: 75kg, 2nd: 66kg 3rd: 57kg, 4th: 48kg, 5th: 39kg, 6th: 33kg, 7th: 27kg, 8th: 21kg, 9th: 15kg, 10th: 9kg

• Between events, ballast is allocated according to championship positions and is carried in qualifying and race one
• For races two and three, ballast is allocated according to the finishing positions in race one and two respectively

 

that is pretty big news

 

Random doesn't reward anybody, not more than it favours the worst. It's just the luck of the draw.

 

Personally I like it when one of the top car get relegated to the back of the grid; I enjoy watching its progress through the field.

It's far better than a fast car spending the whole race without overtaking anyone, IMO.

 

To avoid sandbagging and make qualifs interesting, they could give points for the best 3 times, for example. That should keep the drivers and the teams interested.

 

That's another solution.

 

I accept your objection, and that's why I would favour a random grid more than any other solution. Arrange for a draw 10 minutes before the race when you have to form the grid. That would give the teams and the drivers no time to devise elaborate tactics, etc...

 

I love the BTCC, but I don't think that success ballast would be a solution in F1, because the cars aren't designed for sudden weight change, and just 10kg make a lot of difference in lap time in F1. It's different in touring cars, but F1, like most single-seater are very sensitive to weight difference (even the driver's weight is an element of that).

The Dutch have created "Time Ballast" for their Supercar Challenge, where the cars are penalised by extra seconds added to their compulsory pit stop. It works well for them, but that wouldn't fit with F1 and its super slick tyre changes.

 

So now you want to base the chances on a WDC on luck? One might say that this levels out over a season but same was said over DNF due to misfortune but comparing the team mates in identical cars one does see that this is not the case necessarily

 

My "proposal" was just an idea to keep the races interesting by "reshuffling the pack" and bring some uncertainty in F1.
It's dead boring to watch the same car, driver, team starting from pole and spending the whole race unchallenged.
This repeated at most GPs of the season become a real turn-off for most watchers.
You have to wait for the leaders to catch the back-markers to see some overtaking from them.
If nothing is done, F1 will loose its audience, TV channels will stop buying it, and sponsors will desert as well.
FIA and Liberty should do some head scratching and come up with solutions.

 

You are right but I think the way is to built cars that are able to follow each other and overtake instead of using the cars we have and shuffle things up artificially....It is racing not wrestling....

 

What about unlimited testing for privateer teams and limited testing for factory teams based on previous year WDC/WCC finish?

Smaller teams will stand a better chance and drivers that are good at developing cars can actually use those skills unlike now.

 

The test were limited because the smaller teams can not afford them...

 

1I don't think there is anything that can be done to make things more competitive for more than 2-3 teams at a time, given F1s notion that it has to be the pinnacle of racing technology. Only if power units are returned to some far simpler and are therefore less expensive and time-consuming to use, it is hopeless. Of the four big-budget manufacturers playing in F1, only one has been consistently successful with this complex formula. Add to that that the cars are ruled by very efficient aerodynamic packages that are optimized to run in clean air and it is hopeless parade race after race.

The high tech weenies at the FIA/F1 will never relent. They will only seek to add another layer of technology to cure problems that are already overly technical. Their focus is not racing, it is technology.

 

Sorry but that's not a sport we are talking, it's a circus....

 

It may be a circus to you, but it provides exiting racing that people come back to watch. The good thing is that the result is unpredictable. It's the opposite of F1.
In F1, within 2 or 3 GPs at most, it's very easy to shortlist the WDC contenders, usually no more than 3 every year. No wonder there is a disaffection from the public in F1. They are asked to pay lots of money to watch boring races with limited action.

 

The racing in F1 takes place back at the factories, then every couple of weeks, they get together to see which factory is making forward progress at the fastest rate.