The FIA and FOM have both recently taken on new communications people and it is a very good sign that today there has been a press release about yesterday’s Strategy Group meeting. The fact that there is a press release is a very good sign. This is, in fact, something I cannot remember seeing before: engagement with the fans…
The statement says that the members of the group and representatives of the engine manufacturers (but not the small teams) were invited to attend and they “debated a number of levers aimed at improving the show”. They then voted for the following. Next year there will be a free choice of dry tyre compounds for each team to use during a race weekend. In 2017 there will be faster cars with lap times dropping by 5-6 seconds by reducing the weight of the cars, adopting wider tyres and “through aerodynamic rules evolution”, the reintroduction of refuelling, but maintaining a maximum race fuel allowance (although it is not clear what this will be), higher revving engines and increased noise and a more aggressive look. This is, of course, a step backwards in terms of the presenting a forward-thinking image for the sport. Yes, the engines will still be efficient (although noise is, of course, wasting energy) but the cars will be allowed to burn more fuel. Refuelling was stopped years back because it was deemed a waste to transport refuelling machines around the world, but it has been allowed again to create a better show. Thus it is fair to say that the federation has weakened it position on changing the engine rules, so it is another compromise (read retreat), which pushes show business more to the fore. There will be a “global reflection on race weekend format”, which sounds worrying because there are bound to be folk who will argue for two races and reversed grids and other such fairground activities. There will also be measures to make sure that the drivers will take starts without any outside assistance.
The statement said that there had been “a constructive exchange” regarding a proposal for cost-cutting put forward by independent consulting company that was asked to come up with ideas. The cost-cutting proposals have yet to be put to the smaller teams, which have not been involved in the process to date, but they will now be consulted so that they can give their views (there is no suggestion that any of their proposals would be accepted). The strategy group has rejected the idea of a fifth engine this season but has at least decided to respect the stability of the rules, which means that the engine formula will not change in the short to medium term.
This is all well and good, but it remains to be seen whether this is good enough for the small teams. They have no real power in the current set-up, except that they have very little to lose by going to the European Commission and putting a time bomb under the whole arrangement. We would then find out whether the current arrangements are deemed to be acceptable in terms of competition law, which would be a good idea.
There was no word of customer cars, but these may be included in the cost-cutting proposals put forward by the consulting people, so it cannot be excluded that they are part of the package.
Is it positive or negative? Nothing is going to change in the short term, so that is negative. Changes for next year are minimal and the souping-up of the engines in 2017 are rather too much show business for my taste. Cost-cutting is good, but it depends what the proposals are. It would be good to hear about them…
Two race weekends. What is this, WTCC or something? Leave off!
At least with refuelling there is less chance of seeing tyres falling off after a quick pitstop
@charlie_whiting: Amen brother “Until our sport finds itself a leader who can lead, we should all fear for its future.”-@thebuxtonblog https://t.co/hkswnIS5yR
Refuelling = pits overtaking.
How entertaining.
Not.
(obviously)
This is crazy.
Without refuelling, battles for position come down to undercutting more often than we’d like to admit though.
Exactly, so the issue still isn’t being addressed. I think the issue is the tyres and they need to be more robust and durable. I know that may lead to cars driving away but at least they’ll be on the limit and we’ll see some racing. It wont be processional until the pit window as it is this season.h
Not much different to now, just longer and more dangerous.
My thoughts exactly. After what seemed like a lifetime of snooze-inducing, totally predictable pitstops, they finally reintroduced the element of pitcrew skill to the sport, and now they’re going to screw it all up again.
Great.
The rest of it doesn’t sound too disastrous to me actually (although I still don’t understand what’s wrong with being able to hear the tyres squeal) but it’s one step forward, two steps back…
Sometimes, these guys seem really bright, but this is so stupid as to be untrue. What we really want to make it more entertaining, are cars that look fast and hard to drive, more overtaking on the track, and a cost cap to even things up a bit.
So what do they do? Bring back the complex aero, that means it will be even harder to overtake (and let’s face it, Hamilton couldn’t overtake Vettel at Barcelona on track, even with DRS, because he was too far back at the start of the DRS zone as he couldn’t follow Vettel round the previous bend due to the aero). OK, they make the cars lighter, so they’ll be faster, but they won’t look it because of the aero. And as for costs, refuelling will add shedloads – fuel rigs, their transport, extra guys to operate them, redesign of the cars to accommodate smaller tanks…….. ….and that doesn’t even bring in the safety aspect.
Just sort out the aero (ground effect cars?), show us the drivers working to control the things, and stop tinkering round the edges!
Dropping the pretense of Hybrid as well as the Turbos which they did not discuss would of gone a long way towards curbing the costs and increasing the competitiveness . As to the rest ? Same old same old in a slightly different package . Still too expensive . Still unneeded complication . Still with DRS and Press to Pass silliness . Still destined no doubt ( unless serious changes are made ) to continue on with the same old same old to F1’s eventual demise
And just as we’re discussing this ? FOMgate [ excess payments to Ferrari ] blows wide open . To quote the bard Peter Sinfield ;
” Welcome back my friends , to the show that never ends . We’re so glad you could attend . Come inside . Come inside “
The sports crisscrosses the globe in a fleet of cargo jets. Whether the race cars get 4mpg or 6mpg is moot, people aren’t that stupid. Driving around in circles for fun is never going to be a “green” activity. So turn up the wick, use more fuel, make the show more entertaining.
…and no-on will watch for long
Viewers are leaving in droves today. The grandstands were pitifully empty at Barcelona. Do you think the people who ring their hands about wasting fuel racing are the sort of people who are watching F1 in the first place, are they the people who buy the performance cars Ferrari, McLaren, AMG et al are trying to flog using F1?
F1 is not my livelihood. I watch and follow it for fun, to be entertained. “I can’t overtake, save fuel, save tyres, hold station” != entertainment. I’ve been watching it since the late 1970’s, and it’s losing me. God help the sport if people like me stop watching. I have no intention of attending another GP in person the way things stand today.
People can watch Formula E if they want to watch nice, quiet “green” cars buzz along.
Exactly! The technology and innovation has always been an attraction for me.
Because its not “green” people won’t watch? Are you kidding? Or is the sport trying to appease those who don’t care for motorsport anyways?
I’m all for advanced engineering, and I have no issues with the current PU regulations. But to go around saying the sport is “more green” is a hipster marketing exercise that is bound to fail. Drop green, and use efficiency instead.
Also I am skeptical about the increase in costs associated with refueling. Did the teams just take less equipment? Or did they instead fill the void left by the refueling rigs and pack in more junk for the weekend?
Drop green…. Says it all
Joe – has any research been done to determine whether the fans actually care about the “green” part? Whilst I applaud the engineering & technology development, and hope there is some trickle down effect, the actual real impact of this “green F1” is insignificant, and I think most fans understand that.
It is not insignificant. It is useful technology that is filtering through the industry. Just because it has only got to market in Supercars does not mean it will not…
Doesn’t matter what the fans think. The engine formula wasn’t intended to appeal to fans it was intended to appeal to engine manufacturers – who in general appear positive about it, although they’re less keen to trumpet it because it’s almost negative PR by association.
Esteban – the big teams will have filled the void with more toys. The smaller teams will have reduced their costs. Refuelling adds to the minimum spend, which is dangerous in a formula where half the grid is penny-pinching.
Exactly this
Comments like.noise is just wasted energy, well using tyres for a few laps is wasting energy, flying around the globe for a 90 minute race is wasting energy. Lets get back to racing turn up the fuel and go as quick as you can that’s what I thought the idea was
I think you have missed the point
Refuelling! Really! How does that cut costs, more hardware to be air freighted the world more mechanics needed for each pistoP. As for the show more strategic pitlane overtakes not good for the spectacle of racing never mind the negative impression of needing to refuel Poor. Very poot
Joe, I think you are a bit unfair. You say the noise is wasted energy. Maybe for you, because F1 is your world and have been part of it and in the middle of it for decades, but for us mortals, which might plan to see a GP every 2 years or so, the noise is one of the best parts of an F1 weekend if not the best. I been the Silverstone in 2013 and the noise is what blew me away. Sitting in the Village B stand, I could not see much of the cars or the racing, giving that I was seeing them every minute and a half. Had to use binoculars to follow the pecking order on the big screen and because of everybody talking around me, you could not even hear the circuit commentary.
Also, not sure how you can get pit lane passes, how hard is to get them or how much it costs, but getting anywhere close to an F1 car during a 3 day GP weekend is pretty impossible. So you might not think the noise is a big deal, but if you were in my shoes, you would change your mind.
A waste of energy is “cruising” or “looking after the tyres” for lap after lap after lap or “running your own race” and not battling for every position at every given time. I love strategy, but not to the extent that these tyres are dictating.
Like DC said in his latest article for BBC, you rarely see drivers making errors these days, because they are not driving the cars to the limit. That kind of racing is a waste of energy.
Sorry, noise is wasted energy. There is no argument about that. Whether we need the noise for the fans is another question.
What do you mean? Is F1 there for the fans or not in your view? I assumed that’s why is called a sport. I read somewhere that the sales for Silverstone are up this year compared to last year, but I would never go back to a GP if the noise is not there. I do like the concerts in the evening in the camping area and the atmosphere during the day, but if I can’t follow the race, can’t hear the cars going past and for sure I won’t see the cars up-close, then why would I pay £350 for a 3-day ticket? And that is without any food and drinks.
EXACTLY. You sit a mile away, pay a fortune for your ticket and to stay there and get there and eat and drink while you’re there. Then you can’t see the big screen, if there is even any action to watch on it.
‘I been the Silverstone in 2013 and the noise is what blew me away. Sitting in the Village B stand, I could not see much of the cars or the racing, giving that I was seeing them every minute and a half. Had to use binoculars to follow the pecking order on the big screen’
What a damning statement of the modern F1 spectators experience that is ! Sitting in a stand having paid a fortune for a ticket, you could barely see the cars and had to use binoculars to see the big screen.
You couldn’t make it up.
THIS IS WHY SPECTATOR NUMBERS ARE DROPPING. Not to mention the relative lack of genuine on track overtaking.
Hi Joe,
Have you done an article recently on what you would change if it was up to you?
I am not sure I see the point of that. It is not up me and is unlikely ever to be…
Wasted energy? If you look at it clinically the whole F1 circus is wasted energy. If you look at it as a sport then you need engaged fans and what Bogdan says above should be making alarm bells go off.
Without fans F1 has no purpose and as a fan who has been following F1 since the days of Hunt I have never been more disillusioned than I am now. I simply am not interested in an economy drive, tire preservation, DRS or KERS. The current F1 regulations are frankly shit.
I want to see the best drivers going balls out in the fastest cars. Nothing else. That is what F1 used to be and what I would love it to be again.
And when was Formula 1 like that? When did the drivers not have to work with the fuel consumption and the tyres?
Joe, It was always about managing tyres, but not to this extent. Like Sponge says, I am also confused. Maybe F1 needs to state clearly what its main aim is. I think F1 is about best drivers in the fastest cars going as fast as possible. That is not happening at the moment. These fast drivers and cars, are clearly limited by the restrictions imposed by the regulation.
I am all for technology and inovation, but that should (in my view) be secondary to the sports’ main atribute, which I believe should be finishing the race as fast as possibly the car permits. The regulations should be set for safety and sportive reasons, not technologicaly.
Errr? !960’s/70’s/80’s/90’s Joe. Well for most of a 40 year period, there were a few times such as 1988 when fuel tanks got smaller and boost was cut, and there were times when F1 cars ran out of fuel, but usually that was down to the metering unit being out, and more fuel being used in a race. In general, for many years cars had fuel enough for a race. Tyres used to last a race too, unless one got a puncture. Nursing tyres, nursing fuel and brakes, coasting into corners, ERS/DRS any other acronyms, people just are not interested mate.
Tell me where it is a fantastic thing to the public that an F1 car can run on a sniff of fuel by coasting, and yet have to change tyres that cost £100’s or £1000’s every 30 miles? And use brake discs that cost £1000’s and last maybe 190 miles? Let’s be realistic, F1 is not about science, it is about the fastest guys in the fastest cars racing flat out for 200 miles or so, and the one who goes quickest yet keeps his car going, wins. He ought to keep his tyres and brakes up together, should know he has 10lts of fuel left for his slowing down lap and run at his quickest in Final Qualifying.
I’m sorry but the current formula is like a cross between a Chemical & Engineering Exam, and Michael Portillo’s Train Trips Across Europe with Bradshaw’s…..the journey is too slow to be of interest, but the scenery is nice.
Jack Brabham describes doing 3 Formula 1 races in a row, practice qualifying and race on one set of tyres……
Strictly speaking it is but the amount of energy wasted in any increase in noise levels over what we have now is miniscule in comparison to the energy used as horse powers. It is also smaller than the waste caused by limitations on downforce in order to slow the cornering speeds (it causes more acceleration out of the corner).
That’s not the point. F1 was supposed to be about breaking new ground. This is retrograde
Formula 1 “works” on the premise of being entertainment, not of being a science project.
No, it has always been both
The science becomes ever more esoteric, however.
Sometimes I get the impression that F1 is looking more and more like the horse-racing stables using ever improving nutritional and physiological science in order to make a horse run faster.
It’s great fun and all, but it’s destined to become ever less relevant to the rest of the world. This is an unavoidable consequence of the development of science and engineering, where all disciplines are becoming more specialised because the common ground is the low-hanging fruit and has already been picked.
“but for us mortals, which might plan to see a GP every 2 years or so, the noise is one of the best parts of an F1 weekend if not the best”
Please do not copy Ron Walkers attitude to lump together all fans without being asked as for many of us the shrieking noise of the last decade was rather a nasty by-product. The best part of a Formula 1 racing weekend was and is the genuine racing, from 1950 onwards.
Really, and how do you plan to follow the race if you are standing in a grandstand and see the cars going past every minute and a half? Watching F1 on TV I agree that the sound is the last thing on my list, but if you are at the race track, that is what hits you. It used to be the sound that you would not hear ANYWHERE in the daily life.
I think you misunderstood what Joe meant by wasted energy. He is not talking about man-hours tweaking rules or adapting to them. He is talking about actual energy you get say out of a litre of petrol. More noise (i.e. energy) coming out of the exhaust, means less energy is being transferred to the tires. Compare it to a light bulb. If you provide it with a certain amount of electricity, some of that energy is changed into light. Some of it is wasted by making the light bulb hot. Ideally light bulbs would stay cool and all the electricity used would be changed into light.
The explosive sound of a Formula One car at full throttle is part of the spectacle. What’s needed is a banning order on the morons who sound airhorns at GP meetings, or even segregate them to a seperate grandstand?
Can they be put in a sound-proofed room with all the people who had vuvuzelas?
Refueling? I am surprised they aren’t bringing back grooved tires while they are at it. I like the sound of the cars, not sure I want the same sound only louder. I wonder if there could be aero elements on the cars to break up the “dirty air” they trail – I know it would be “hard” to do, but it is F1 – this would be better than DRS and a constant. I imagine that part of the aero design now involves optimizing dirty air to defend against passing.
You can avoid creating dirty air. Just get rid of the wings. Never heard a rational technical explanation of why they won’t swap the huge draggy wings for ground effect. F1 cars – the pinnacle of motorsport tech – are monstrously draggy devices, more an example of aerodynamic brute force than of efficiency.
The only explanation I have heard is that the wings are ‘needed’ as sponsorship space. Which is truly stupid.
Actually 4ule, wings probably aren’t needed for sponsorship reasons now, as all the cars have shed loads of empty space on the chassis bodywork, since there are fewer sponsors!
Why not save money by reducing number of people at a pitstop – more chance for errors. Also save money by making front wings simpler and only allow 4 wing configurations over the season. Both of these measures would surely introduce overtaking on track and in the pits?
Refuelling has always correlated with a massive drop in on track overtaking, every time it has been introduced, and then there has been a massive increase in overtaking following it being axed.
Refuelling locks drivers into a set stint length once they leave the pits as their fastest laps will always be the ones at the end when their car is lightest. This means that under refuelling strategies cannot be changed in an instant and instead have to be done at the scheduled stop, which drastically reduces the effectiveness of making a strategy change.
Refuelling means that the cars have much less mass variance (33kg for a two stop race vs 100kg at the moment) – this makes them much more stable and less compromised.
Refuelling is also much more expensive, in terms of infrastructure needed at the circuit, the systems being included on the cars, and the number of pit lane mechanics required. This coming at a time they are saying costs are too high in the sport.
Refuelling is very bad news for Formula 1.
“There will also be measures to make sure that the drivers will take starts without any outside assistance”
Blimey … so, in-car starters? I can see the whinging from the aero guys about packaging and added weight starting any second now ….
As in racing starrts, not engine starts
This is a shambles. The best way to get close racing is to have stable regulations, yet they are changing the regulations literally every year in a way that not only impacts the teams, but also the tyre supplier. Refuelling was scrapped partly to save costs, yet it is being re-introduced again? Purleeeze… This is the sort of dicking about that CART did in the 1998 to 2003 time period, that led to a precipitous loss of commercial interest in that series, with engine partners walking away and sponsorship income slowly collapsing.
When F1 last tried to slowly introduce customer cars in the 2006-2007 time period, Williams blocked the move, forcing the likes of Toro Rosso to stop re-using Red Bull chassis and build their own. I would not be surprised if Williams, together with one or two of the other teams, decides to up the ante by filing a complaint with the EU. They may have a lot less to lose than they did one week ago.
> This is the sort of dicking about that CART did in the 1998 to 2003 time period, that led to a precipitous loss of commercial interest in that series, with engine partners walking away and sponsorship income slowly collapsing.
Yes, it is.
It’s a good thing that consequences like those could never befall F1, because of {handwave}…
Joe – sorry if this has been asked before, but can you explain why a certain soft drinks company is one of the four ‘top tier’ CCB teams while Williams (with it’s illustrious reputation and long track record) is not ?
Recent results
Joe, it’s also been reported that teams can select their preferred tyre compounds. Would this mix things up sufficiently in terms of tyre strategy? I’d go further and not mark the tyres to identify the compound. Not very informative for those watching, but if you can’t be sure how far the guy in front is going on this set of tyres, maybe your best bet is to try and overtake him. And yes refuelling will probably put paid to that as fuel loads will decide pit stops and in turn this will narrow tyre choice.
The F1 Strategy Committee is Bernie (FOM), Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Red Bull, Williams, and a floating (sic) member. Last year it was Lotus due to points in the championship. I’m assuming it’s Force India based on the 2014 results.
Can anyone confirm?
You’re right on all counts including Force India but you’ve left out the FIA.
The sport is going down the toilet. Customer cars/ 3-car teams goes against the whole DNA of F1.
I couldn’t stop laughing at this piece
Just read that Toto thinks refuelling will improve things as “it makes the racing a bit more unpredictable for the fans; it means you are not quite sure what is going on.”
Wow.
Because that’s exactly what will halt the decline in people watching races: making it more complex and confusing. Oh yes. Can’t see that one backfiring at all, no way.
I’m glad you too see some positives of the outcome of this meeting. Press releases of Strategy Group meetings have been issued before but maybe you missed those.
It seems also better to me to release a press release when/if the suggestions become fact once they have been approved by the proper regulatory commission. But this one should be a slam-dunk so no problem.
I still wonder why you keep harping about a EU investigation, that won’t happen or deliver a result/verdict anytime soon, so what good is to come from that?
And even if that surprisingly might come to fruition a change to non-EU jurisdiction surely is in the contingency planning.
Jefe, I don’t know who you are, but Joe always seems to intimate that you have something to do with the FIA. If this is the case, and if you are in anyway a motor sport fan as well, then you ought to be as concerned as the majority of fans, that motor sports and F1 in particular, are in such an almighty mess, with few upsides to it…none that I can think of actually.
If you have leverage or say at the FIA, I suggest that you report on how angry and frustrated the fans are, at the mess that is motorsport at present, and for which the FIA are as much to blame as Bernie and CVC, and the Teams!
The only change that is really starting to happen, is that of fans walking away, and when that change is concluded, there won’t be a need for your employer, the FIA, assuming that it is they that you work for at present.
Don’t count on leverage. I think he’s just sucking up to JT to get better gigs…
I have always felt the race weekend format is something which more could be done with, both for spectators at home and in the grandstands. I dont think Sunday’s should be altered. Winning a Grand Prix is the pinnacle of Motorsport and isn’t something which should be devalued by shorter races, reverse grids and the like. But everything else surrounding race weekends really could be altered to improve the overall spectacle, and I feel they should do more to have F1 cars on track in anger through a weekend in one way or another.
I think Friday’s should be split with a 2-3 hour practice/test session to begin the weekend. Followed in the afternoon by some kind of shootouts racing. Maybe a series of very short sprint races, 5 laps long each, 4 cars on track from different constructors. Random starting order, random cars. Not world championship points but the drivers with the most wins under this format at the end of the year go head to head in some way. This would provide a product which is suitable for the “YouTube” generation. Gives circuit owners a way to sell Friday tickets, and pits f1 cars and drivers against each other in a format which isn’t a Grand Prix distance. Would give opportunity to showcase talent up and down the grid and could even be used to give reserve drivers etc opportunity in the cars.
I think qualifying on Saturdays also needs to be altered to prevent the last 10 minutes being all that’s worth watching. I like the knockouts they do, but I think it would be more intriguing if they used a system whereby the cars where all in track at the same time and slowly but surely they eliminated cars. use a target time system, based upon the current fastest lap + a percentage on top. Those who manage to circle within the percentage stay in, those who don’t, are eliminated and the time they ran on the eliminated lap used to determine grid position. The % allowed to remain in qualifying incrementally reduces so as to make it harder to stay in. Once you have maybe 6 or 8 cars left, you then move to a more severe slowest car eliminated and run the cars for 6-8 laps at full pelt, and whoever has the slowest lap is out. The cars are all on track at the same time, must be fuelled to finish the session and its up to the driver to make space for themselves to complete a lap.
Nothing radical, just more of a focus on putting f1 cars on track in anger so people actually have something to watch and f1 broadcasters actually have a product to sell.
As long as the Sunday world championship race is kept as it is. I would welcome any format which puts cars on track in competition. Track cycling has many different formats and each has its own unique appeal, I think F1 should be looking at that and attempt to tap into some ideas.
I can undersrtand the rationale for refuelling as it would allow for smaller fuel tanks and lighter cars, and if fuel flow rates are increased an easy increase in power. However there is going to be an engineering challenge to ensure that this can be done safely with the hybrid power trains – theres much more potential electric energy around the car. compared to when refuelling was last used.in F1.
Oh, honestly, I just give up. They’re “fixing” the bits that don’t need to be fixed, and ignoring the bits that do.
Reintroducing refuelling especially is a massively retrograde move.
Is it conceivable to have no wings and restricted aero? this would make the cars harder to drive, more relevant to the auto industry and user alike, passing would be enhanced because one driver could follow closely and old fashioned overtaking, sans DRS would become exiting again. Is it possible or just too simplistic?
Would you go to a football game with no singing or chanting , thought not .good bye f1 you have been a good friend , he’ll we have had some late nights and a few tears along the way , but your dumped for been boring.
I will be not holding much hope that any of this actually comes to pass.
Something to fill in some time until Monaco perhaps.
Good you are back in business with the computer issues solved.
I was in the commentary box opposite the Benetton pits in 1994 when Jos Verstappen’s car caught fire. Looked absolutely terrifying. Luckily someone- Greg Field (?) reacted very quickly and put it out .Still took over 5 seconds.. Six mechanics with burns plus Jos himself. He still had scars on his nose at the Hungaroring two weeks later. Does F1 really need this sort of excitement? Extra rigs to carry the rigs, the highly flammable fuel itself, mechanics clearly in a hurry to get their man back on track.. asking for trouble.
Yes Andrew, and a nice big battery pack in the middle of it all……
Mr. Frankl, I had the absolute pleasure of meeting you (and driving you to your party) after the Audience with Joe in Austin a few years back. I enjoyed your insight then, just as I do now.
Fantastic comment; from a safety aspect, this is definitely a retrograde step. I don’t think it is going to improve the racing either.
Take care!
It’s been a long time since I heard something as cynical and poorly-thought-out as bringing refueling back.
First, the cars won’t need refueling to make a full race distance, because the flow limitation will stay in place. So the only other reason to bring refueling back is to “spice up the pit stops”.
But if the stops are too fast, the best way to “spice them up” is to reduce the number of people working the car, as many others have said. Front jack man, rear jack man, lollipop man (not lights), and one mechanic on each corner, with one extra mechanic to adjust the front wing etc. That would produce stops in the seven or eight second range, and reduce costs and increase the chance of interesting random reversals of fortune at the same time.
At the end of the day, the only thing that bringing back refuelling would do (other than increase the complexity and cost of the car and the tonnage and cost of the freight) would be to create an increased chance of something going wrong and a car charging down the pit-lane with the fuel hose still attached.
One would think (especially after two near-misses in Barcelona) that the “strategy” group could come up with a spicy show without endangering the mechanics in the process.
“…through aerodynamic rules evolution”
How about an aerodynamic rules revolution? A lot of this sounds like regression rather than progression. Most of the world are living in the past, and these days F1 is no different. I say get someone sane in charge who knows what they are doing who can put their feet down and tell the teams how it’s going to be — why should they be making the rules? The teams along with the current F1 management clearly have no idea what they are doing and have nearly killed the sport. Make sensible, stable, open rules and regulations and new manufactures will be begging for a grid position.
Regardless, I’ll believe any of this when I see it. I really do hope F1 improves in the coming years.
When has Barcelona ever hosted an exciting race? Maldonados surprise win for Williams excepted, never. The first races of the year were highly entertaining but after one procession everyone is screaming to improve the show. Formula one ought to be the leading edge of automotive technology and the current formula has got that right. Watching a car go fast in a straight line is not as impressive as watching a car navigate a series of corners fast. Cutting edge engine an aero technology are what it’s all about and maybe there should be a track design strategy group that can help Barcelona put on a show in the future.
“through aerodynamic rules evolution”
These are the words we need to be hopeful about. Single, or twin element wings, perhaps adjustable by the driver would make the cars faster down the straight and difficult to control through corners.
Drivers driving 10/10ths for much of the race has to be better than tyre management and driving to Deltas for lap after lap, to see what is left for the last few laps of the race. You may as well just have a short race.
It is a positive step and puts the driver more in control – a ban on data links to the factory is also a logical next step.
But sadly, without an overarching cost cap, I can’t see many small teams surviving in this environment either.
Instead of refuelling they might introduce car change like Formula E. Cheaper(?), more entertaining, lots of new strategy approaches….
Whilst I have no doubt the ‘new’ engines are amazing however they do sound dull and many fans agree, the noise can add to the spectical and make the cars seem faster, just watch the video of Montoya at Monza in 2004 on youtube (admittedly that WAS faster but that’s not the point!) so I’m glad to hear about the engines (as long as it doesn’t make them more expensive).
The cars don’t look as goofy this year but still don’t look great, I’m not sure how designing the cars to look better will go, car manufacturers all try to design good looking cars, some do but many fail miserably so I think we wait and see on that one.
But I really don;t get the refueling thing, we just changed it a few years back! I hated refueling, why would a faster driver risk overtaking when he could just wait a few laps for the pit stops. I think the only ‘excitement’ there was around refueling was when it went wrong and there were lots of big fires. I myself prefer watching F1 for the engineering, driving, overtaking, not really too keen on watching people burning but that’s just me.
Despite all this the most bizarre thing is the group itself, I don’t understand how you can call something a fair sport if a selection of the teams are involved in deciding the future of the sport…
Terrific that there are efforts to get a voice for the group in the form of press releases. But this whole situation seems akin to a circus, you can introduce new acts and more exotic animals but reality is that the animals will eventually die or stop performing if you don’t feed them. Of course the clowns (Bernie & Co) will just move to a different Circus, and so they should.
Smaller teams must be included in all efforts to revitalize F1, they are the future to the sport and the newest talent within it.
I have an idea. Start the race with the drivers standing at the trackside and they have to run to the cars, get in, strap in and start the cars! It’s the way forward!
Oh and straw bales instead of Armco or tyrewalls.
Oh Oh and cloth helmets and goggles….
So we will have wider cars with bigger wings, which although faster, will be even harder to overtake, and any incentive to try anyway is removed by bringing back refueling…..
The aero guys will be rubbing their hands together…”look at all this extra area of car we can play with…lots of aero gains to be made here”
I personally do not care if the current cars are faster or slower than before. If the powers that be could come up with a set of rules that meant what ever speed they were doing, it was mainly sideways, no one else would care either.
Close the wind tunnels, cap the terraflops, bring back the pencil and drawing board and by the way….your wings can have one element only and what you bring to Monza you also run at Monaco!
+1 completely agree
Very disheartening reading. As usual it’s a refusal to face the current issues regarding finance, so F1 goes round in circles again with regulations – like an ever decreasing spiral as it disappears down the plug hole. I forget what comes next? Is it a tyre war to spice up racing when no-one bothers overtaking anymore because of fuel strategy?
What have Pirelli got to say about this? At the moment they have to ship 4 sets of tyres around the world (prime, option, inter and wets) now they will have to ship how many? 6? For everyone?
To be frank, when you get drivers of the class of Sir Jackie Stewart being quoted ( in a Portuguese paper ) as saying that Formula 1 is ” too complicated ” and ” not interesting anymore ” then there isn’t much need to question what will happen. Whether it takes 2-3 or 5 years for F1 to become an irrelevant sport, is purely down to how quickly the participants wish to see it’s demise.
Bernie is simply not interested in the fans, CVC only wants money, the Sponsors are drifting away to other sports where the grandstands are not as devoid of spectators as in F1. The Circuits can no longer survive without Government cash input, so the core circuits are being dropped by Bernie.
The Teams are so greedy and so insular that they have no interest in their fans, whilst the Drivers are much the same, and are only interested in how many Zeros are on their paycheques. The likes of Coulthard, Warwick & Stewart question the make up of F1, while even the Media doesn’t seem to want to confront the issues, and in some cases just blames the fans for not being…well…fans?? And the FIA isn’t visible anymore.
If you love motor racing you will have seen this all played out by CART and the Indianapolis circuit some years ago, when between those parties, they completely destroyed Open Wheel racing in the USA. A situation that has not been recovered from as yet. The fans in the States basically had enough, and walked away, but those in the F1 “bubble” are so damned stupid that they can’t see the same thing happening with F1.
In my local town, where I’ve lived for 50 years, the 2 newsagents used to stock Autosport, Motoring News & Motorsport. In the last 5 years, they have stopped holding Motorsport, and only 1 keeps 2 copies a week of Motoring News ( Motorsport News….yeah I know! ), while there are usually 6-8 copies of Autosport in the 2 shops on a Thursday, and 5-6 left there all week until returned before the next issue.
Motorsport needs to face facts, it is driving it’s fans away. It thought the wealthy and the 30 sec Attention Span Generation would be the future, but they are not. The future is still here, there are many fans who would like to see motor racing again, and like to follow it, but if they are not wanted, then eventually they get the message and go…..how to get them back is a whole different story…..but without them, there won’t be a Formula 1 for the future, and one can make it as “hip” and ” relevant ” as one wishes, but just as Labour found out in the UK last week, if one doesn’t offer what people want, one gets totally rejected. What was offered by the Teams/Bernie etc on Thursday, was just another packet of nails for the coffin.
I’m sorry if this all sounds miserable and downbeat, but it needs saying and it needs to actually be recognized by the powers that be, and if it isn’t then what I’ve loved for 50 years will be gone completely, and may never come back, that is my personal fear. Whatever individuals may think, F1 right now is a turn off as a sport, and if one doesn’t see that this is a fact that needs immediate work, then the terms head, sand & bucket come to mind! Damn! I really hate writing such stuff, but it has to be said, and indeed, it needs shouting from the rooftops….F1 is NOT OK RIGHT NOW!! To say that it is, is to follow the Mantra of the participants, who are too dumb to see that they are choking the Golden Goose, and too thick to understand that when they have killed it off, there won’t be any money for them to roll around in….that’s it….it just makes me angry and then terribly sad and frustrated.
And before the Trolls and Smart Alecs get going and say JYS & Co aren’t current, I bet that if people such as Kimi & Alonso, where able to truthfully answer the question, “Is F1 as it should be?”….I have no doubt that they would say, “no, sorry, it’s rubbish right now and needs a total overhaul!”.
Right my personal view, so carry on and slag me off now, because, you know what?….I really don’t care at all…anymore.
“I bet that if people such as Kimi & Alonso, where able to truthfully answer the question, “Is F1 as it should be?”….I have no doubt that they would say, “no, sorry, it’s rubbish right now and needs a total overhaul!””
Their desire to be wishing they were racing in the 70s and 80s amounts to pretty much your point. Other drivers talk about how they preferred the format/challenge of races and cars at the beginning of their careers.
Your points are spot on.
Well said!
I wouldn’t mind seeing a slightly different weekend format (i.e. Free practice 1 and 2 on Saturday, with qualifying in the afternoon, before the race on Sunday. I go to Silverstone every year but Friday isn’t really worth it for me anymore as I have to sort out an additional days worth of accommodation and FP1 starts ridiculously early. Squeezing everything into 2 days would surely save the teams a lot of money too?
Regarding the two races in a weekend thing…
I wouldn’t mind seeing a format such as the following:
Scrapping qualifying at 4 venues a year. Qualifying is replaced by a sprint race on Saturday where the starting grid is based on reverse championship order. The order of this race dictates the qualifying positions for the next day.
I think a format like this would work, especially as points would only be given out on Sunday. It would also help get people into the stands – Why not let some of the more classic venues like Spain or Germany, where attendance’s are falling, trial such an idea?
Oh. And if the independents are forced out, I’m done with F1. Too much greed and self interest and not enough actual governance.
Spaniards did not come to the race because there was great action, they came to see Alonso winning. Sprint race will mean nothing to them.
> Oh. And if the independents are forced out, I’m done with F1.
This.
Ditto if ‘allowed to stay, but not as constructors’.
(Yes, even if the team I follow is bought out & allowed to remain as a constructor. This has been brewing for me ever since F1 became a franchise).
Having said all that- I don’t believe that it will happen. And if it does, I think it will be reversed pretty rapidly. We’re already seeing what happens when an inner circle team stops winning. This is a recipe for complete disintegration of the series within ten years, I reckon.
My (small) bet is that The Bernard is playing chicken with the teams who won’t voluntarily give up their special treatment. “Oh, you want *this* do you? You sure about that? ‘Kaythanksbye…”
If Red Bull can’t stomach finishing 8th now, how is “last place among the constructors” going to play? Or “12th place behind Ferrari & Mercedes customer teams”? And what happens to Red Bull today can happen to Ferrari, Mercedes, anyone tomorrow.
Maybe I’m just being hopelessly over-optimistic. First time for everything.
A few years back I had argued for a similar format whereby the current world championship standings determines the grid order for a qualifying sprint race. The results of the qualifying sprint race would then determine the final grid order for the race proper for Sunday afternoon. This would ensure that the leading cars would have to overtake every other competitor throughout the race weekend in order to win a race. I’m not sure points need to be awarded for the qualifying sprint race as the final grid position for Sunday would be sufficient incentive.
For the first race one would use last year’s final championship standings to determine grid order (so the reigning champ starts at the back and the runner up alongside him and so on) for the sprint race. Rookies would start at the front. Multiple rookies would be determined by constructor’s final standings and if a team has two rookies, this would determined via a toss of a coin/ballot.
Where are the pompom girls and the marching band?
You mean they don’t use those to spice up ‘the show’ already? ;0)
Ha ha Joe….I think they are called “Grid Girls ” and the marching band has already been used in Sochi so Bernie could suck up to his new bestest egomanic friend!
I think something similar was sugested in the early 1980s. One observer suggested that the best spot from which to watch the qualifying race at Monaco would be Nice.
Correction:
“whereby the current world championship standings determines the grid order for a qualifying sprint race.”
Should read as:
“whereby the current world championship standings reversed determines the grid order for a qualifying sprint race.”
As a long time Gordon Murray/ Piquet/ fan car etc fan, by association I have had a soft spot for Bernie. He took control, stableised and duting the eighties and nineties we had a great, intrigue/ spectacle/ sport.
But now i just wish he would sod off. There is no elephant in the room. It is a bloody great mammoth sired by a dinasour. The events of the last few days simply underine the disaster that is todays F1.
I am looking forward to maybe the 2022 season when he has gone. Hopefully his greedy friends will have too. There will probabaly be number of disasters for the teams and people who matter.
The sport will have imploded. Vested interests will have been and gone and we will have a proper division of funds; the organisers no longer try to steal all commercial partners and we have an organiser with backbone and teeth.
Till then, i will follow the scene asusual but with guilt and disaappointment as some of the good guys really have a hard time.
So there will be smoke, but will there be mirrors?
I thought that the “show” came from the competition of the racing: is this so naiive?
I have tried to research why the laurel leaves which, maybe, preceded the champagne spraying, as part of the “show,” disappeared. The nearest that I could get to finding out why they were dropped was that – a commercial rights holder deemed that the wreath covered-up the teams on-overall sponsorship motifs.
Now that sponsorship is less important because fewer people see it as the sport hides behind a pay wall, may we see this return to bolster the “show?”
Refuelling was allowed, but no-one did it. The races were usually won by the fastest cars. Then everyone did it, and the fastest cars won. Then it was banned on safety grounds, and the fastest cars won. Then it magically became safe again, and the fastest cars still won. Then it was banned again, and guess what? The fastest cars carried on winning! Unless the idea is to spice up the action with the occasional pit-lane brew-up, what difference will it actually make?
I am expecting an Asinine €cc£e$tone “Idea” to surface just in time for Monaco, like making the cars run Q1 in reverse gear or making them carry a week’s shopping and a plastic FIA-mandated baby in a child seat.
I think we need a minute’s silence
the turkeys have voted for christmas
I find it interesting if FIA president Todt´s efforts will be applauded by the members of the UN regarding “FIA action for Road Safety” if he is pushing regulations which should make cars dangerously faster (5-6 sec, meanwhile, WEC is slowing down for safety reasons), produce more emissions with higher revs without any purpose and should reinvent tankstops which may include some nasty bonfires. Considering this, I wonder which measure will survive the WMSC meeting……
Secondly, if the small teams (overseen by the Strategy Group) do not apply at the EU Commission in next time it could be too late…..
Regarding CVC and Ecclestone, it´s all about the infamous stock market launch. If CVC does the same deal as they did with Samsonite, they will leave the sport in 2017……
Good
I don’t think CVC will leave until/unless they find a buyer to give them £100’s Millions for F1.
Unless the aforementioned buyer is certifiably insane, it will be unlikely that CVC will find a buyer. Therefore they will just sit there like Vultures, picking over the profits from the corpse of F1 until there is nothing left….and I expect that this will probably leave them with a massive and handy tax loss to recoup!
There’s more money to be made by investing. CVC just couldn’t be bothered.
Surly F1 is show business Joe? Fans want more power and more noise, they always will. This years cars are slower and easier to drive than ever before.You only have to look at how well the young guys stepping out of Gp2 cars are doing to realise that.
It is a balance. And the cars are not slow.
Eight seconds a lap slower from 2005?
Whatever the gap I doubt that anyone could see it visually – some talk about the gap to the back of the grid but those cars are bloody fast however you look at it. In any case, they’re not in fact 8 seconds slower – it depends which race one looks at, prevailing conditions etc. Best to look the stats for each race – it’s variable to say the least. It’s a pointless comparison I would suggest Brendan. As for being easy to drive, I doubt if Fangio could have driven a modern F1 car – but what does that prove? Things evolve.
It’s less than five percent…
Fangio, arguably the greatest racing driver of all times could have driven a modern F1 car in his sleep.
And I suggest to Lewis and Fernando could drive the 1950s cars faster because they are much better prepared for the job…
Probably true also!
Could you give us the two lap times to compare?
“Fans want more power and more noise”
They got it. The cars are more powerful now. You just don’t know that because either you have not been paying attention, or you ignorantly believe that noise=power.
“This years cars are slower and easier to drive than ever before”
How would you know they are easier to drive? Have you ever driven one? Probably not. They are actually faster through the speed traps as well. They just lost some aero, so they are slower through the corners.
Actually, from everything I have heard from the drivers (including Fernando Alonso in the Spain Thursday presser) they are actually more difficult to drive due to an increase in power coupled with a decrease in down force. This is why if you use the two eyeballs attached to your head, you can see the cars squirm more on corner exit. It’s all right there if you know what to look for.
“You only have to look at how well the young guys stepping out of Gp2 cars are doing to realise that”
FYI- young people perform better than old people in many sports, due to something called “youthfulness”. With more opportunities for youngsters to race, and beginning at a younger age, many of these “rookies” are probably better prepared than the “rookies” of yesteryear. So it is actually quite logical that the young guys would be better than the old guys. That’s life. Unfortunately I am quite privy to this dynamic, as I get regularly beaten by those young guys on the race track.
When I read comments like yours, I think: “if this is the way most F1 fans think, then it’s no wonder why all these stupid changes are being made to the sport”.
F1 has the insurmountable task of trying to provide great racing for an audience that has no clue what the f*** they are talking about when it comes to racing.
Dale D, we’ve crossed swords before, and as always, I would defend your right to your views, even though I believe them to be absolutely wrong.
Your final 2 paragraphs are indicative of what is wrong in F1 and motorsport in general these days. Like the Labour Party here in the UK, who blamed the UK Voters for being foolish in not voting for Labour, you have the idea that only you are right about F1. And the rest of us spectators and fans are somehow not as intelligent as you and therefore cannot have worthy opinions, especially if those opinions do not concur with yours!
That is the same arrogant attitude that pervades F1, a series that is mostly full of chancers and spivs these days, and which does not make any effort to retain or even to connect, with it’s audience.
Labour in the UK moans that it cannot understand why it is not in power and was rejected by the public. The teams in F1 wonder why the series is losing fans by the shed load, and is being rejected by the public. Same problems same reasons, these being that neither of them is offering what the public wants….and the same answer for each, offer what people want, and they will turn on to you….continue to offer what they don’t want, and they will bury you.
Please don’t refer to other contributor as ‘ignorant’, and please don’t presume to know what I have or have not done. What I do have is some opinions on a sport that i love and have been following “Probably” longer than you have. I just don’t feel the need to attack or be abusive to other people when they. express an opinion different to mine. So before you start making derogatory statements about other contributors and their intellectual shortcomings, try to understand their viewpoint first. You never know,it might help you develop both life and communication skills.
Perhaps if you contributed more than a simpleton complaint submitted as a veiled attack on the talents of excellent drivers, and left out words like “always”, I would have been a bit easier on you. Nothing in your comment communicated any love of the sport, despite your presence here, in this forum. Sometimes, people arrive just to ignorantly fling mud at the sport.
Perhaps you have been following it longer than I have. There is a good chance you have. Unfortunately statements like this:
” This years cars are slower and easier to drive than ever before.You only have to look at how well the young guys stepping out of Gp2 cars are doing to realise that.”
… makes it seem as if you have not. It is a pretty “ignorant” comment.
Cheers!
I think you reply speaks for itself. if you had read my post properly you would see that I never once attacked the sport or the drivers. I was addressing the differences with past and present day cars. Perhaps you should go and write your own blog as your so knowledgable on all matters, and leave this one for people who only want to have a friendly exchange of view on the sport they love.
Why doesn’t FOM / The old grey man pay the costs of freighting the refuelling rigs around the globe ?
Just curious, Joe; what do you make of the fact that last week Audi was saying it was open to a possible future in Formula One, and this week it has announced that it has no interest in Formula One?
The only thing that has changed since last Monday: the F1 “Strategy Group” had their meeting.
Do you think Audi has been turned off by yet another round of half-baked solutions, in which the powers that be proved the only thing they can actually do is argue?
Or is this all just media back and forth that is not worth reading into?
I have no idea
is there any word on whether there will be wider track cars? The proposals seem like a missed opportunity. The central issues to sort out first before everything else is cost control and governance. Bring on the EU commission investigation. Can anyone lodge the complaint?!
Who watches race to see cars being refilled?
Im sure like the rest of you your mission on a sunday morning is to get in and out of supermarket petrol station as quickly as possible ( so your back in time for F1). I’m sure endemol will pitch a game show where you pull up, get straight and put the (correct) fuel as quickly as possible without running over the person in front of you when pulling out?
Bound to be a winner with millions of viewers? Who needs the actual race?
Hi Joe on the subject of communication I noticed that McLaren has changed their profile picture on Face Book to represent the coca cola style… a story there?