|
Lap times provide a hard number, and something that at least seems more non-subjective. People ask why we have these debates. Well, this is the way many try to avoid them, by using straight-up numbers comparisons.
Trying to say, "This is better racing", is too individual and subjective to get traction with others. It leads to unsatisfying discussion oftentimes, because it just doesn't seem to lead anywhere.
And no, with the FIA/FIM involved, I think most of the noticeable changes at Le Mans would have been made anyway.
Speed is partly a compensation. We don't get as much in the way of the top-line, performance road cars in GT racing anymore. The new Grade 1 tracks aren't as satisfying either. So, we want the cars to go faster to make up for at least some of that. And let's be honest, if we took loads of downforce off and did other things to slow them down, it's not like the old tracks or existing tracks like how they used to be will ever be brought back. You might make F1 back into 1.5-liter torpedoes (like 1961-65), but a track that makes that interesting, like Clermont-Ferrand, is never coming back.
Furthermore, it just gets messy. If you slow down LMP1, LMP2, and GTE, then you need to slow down GT3, GT4, TCR, etc. And yes, we're human, and to a great many humans, foolish though some might think it, bigger, faster, whatever-er is simply perceived as "better", and that's not magically going away anytime soon.
Hope that clears some things up, and we've had a race today at Spa, and one coming up at Laguna Seca. I'm good with anybody winnning, so long as it's not Cadillac, or at least not the #10.
|