Is massive money spoiling F1 - if so what’s the cure?

[alchemy]

I realise that removing high finance from F1 is a bit like trying to un-invent the wheel. BUT there’s little doubt the big money that’s brought so much to F1 is threatening to take even more from it. Its gradually turned into a sport where the result is usually far more interesting than the actual race. The glitz and glamour are merely serving to camouflage what it really ought to be about - the ultimate in racing!

The corporate giants are going to ultimately be the nail-in-the-coffin of F1 as we know it. Sure it suits BMW, Mercedes, Ford, Marlboro etc to invest squillions. For them its an advertising medium and nothing more. But when the accountants decide it’s not working - BANG they’ll pull the plug and there’ll be outta here! What would happen if advertising space was severely limited in area, and all motor manufacturers along with cigarette companies were directly banned? A lot less money would be sloshing about that’s for sure. But open up the rules a little to encourage inventiveness.

If the cars are sending me to sleep on the track, then I don’t really give a toss how magnificent Mclarens ‘Communications centre’ is. I’d rather they use a motorhome and an awning! It’s the racing that should be magnificent! Mind you with the absents of motor corporations and ciggy money - how many communication centres would we see? See how self regulating it would be?

There was a time when drivers made it to F1 mostly on talent. Not anymore! It’s such a costly affair over half of them pay to be there whilst the select few get spoilt rotten!
Kimi Raikkonen in a post race interview after his 2nd place in France, "Kimi you must be delighted with that." With a face as long as a fiddle, he replied. "Not really!" I had a lot of respect for him up to that point! If I was West or Mercedes or even Ron Dennis, I’d have said; "Perhaps Kimi you’d like to go back to Formula Renault or Karting for a while - you spoilt brat!"

Finally. I don’t care how good someone is at driving a racing car, playing golf or trying to punch someone’s lights out - its hard to justify the telephone number figures the top ones get. It’s disproportionate, quite obscene and consequently does sport in general no good at all.

Amen.

I would say that an excess of money takes the sport out of F1. It is also true that without sufficient money F1 could not exist.

Corporations, such as motor manufacturers, through globalisation, have more power than governments, let alone sports regulators like the FIA. It is the way of the world.

The only cure I can come up with would involve enforcing a limit on the amount of money that can be spent. This would cover exotic materials, blowing up engines, electronic wizardry and aerodynamics. I have no idea how this could be effectively regulated. I miss proper close racing and find myself watching videos of seasons past (85,86,90,91,93,) where, although there still was a lot of money involved, drivers were allowed to speak their mind, rather than forced to spout PR nonsense, team mates raced each other and there were no fake pit stops.

I can understand why Kimi was ****ed off at coming 2nd in France - he capitulated to Michael's bully boy move on the exit of the hairpin which lost him the GP.

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by TTT
and there were no fake pit stops.

I can understand why Kimi was ****ed off at coming 2nd in France - he capitulated to Michael's bully boy move on the exit of the hairpin which lost him the GP.

How could there be fake pitstops?

You wanted racing and that's what racing is all about...what? just because Michael was closing on behind Kimi, means that he's bullying? That was Kimi's mistake and he admit it himself and i don't remember in those words of his saying that he's ****ed off!

Pitstops are not required other than by manipulative regulations = fake.

On the exit of the hairpin, Kimi drove off the circuit to allow Michael past = capitulating

Any driver used to winning (e.g. Kimi pre F1) will not be over the moon when he finishes in 2nd place because of his own error. Look at his body language in the post race interview.

[Valve Bounce]

You have it all wrong - just think about what you have put on the title of this thread. It is the lack of money for the lower order teams that is killing F1. We are about to lose 4 teams in 2 years for lack of money, and you talk about massive money ? Be real. Look at the teams that are hurting, not the ones at the top.

Maybe it is the unequal distribution of money within F1 that causes these problems.

[Jukebox]

TTT...

Maybe formula1 cars should have cells the size of a tanker and more grooved on tyres to finish the whole duration of the race so that pitstops will not be branded as fake

Kimi surrendering the lead so that Michael could win? LOL you have got to be joking right? come on...surely you could come up with a better one

[Valve Bounce]

Originally posted by TTT
Pitstops are not required other than by manipulative regulations = fake.

On the exit of the hairpin, Kimi drove off the circuit to allow Michael past = capitulating

Any driver used to winning (e.g. Kimi pre F1) will not be over the moon when he finishes in 2nd place because of his own error. Look at his body language in the post race interview.

You saw body language from Kimi? I saw a total blank.
As for capitulating, I think it was more of a mistake by Kimi.
Capitulating is what the Poms did in Singapore-no comparison.
As for the pitstops, there is no reason why cars cannot have large enough fuel cells to go the distance. They work it out that if they make a pit stop, or two stops, the extra speed of the cars more tha makes up for the time lost. This is not new, or rocket science.
As for team mates not being allowed to race each other, this is not new - and this goes right back to the fifties. I think you have to realise that there were many good F1 drivers like Ronnie Petersen who did not race their team mates. Of course, when you have one guy from one team who won't race his brother in a rival team, that is something else.

-Jukebox-

Did you watch F1 before pitstops and refuelling were enforced by the rules ? If so can you justify your "tanker" remark please? Who needs grooved tyres anyway?

I did not say Kimi surrendered the lead so Michael could win, I said he "capitulated" - different word. I have the incident on video. Michael aimed his car at where Kimi's was, and Kimi drove off the track , which allowed Michael to pass. If Kimi had stayed on the track there may have been a crash, but Michael would not now have the psychological advantage next time they do battle.

Anyway, this thread concerns how money, or IMHO how the unequal distribution of money is detrimental to the sport of F1. What do you think about that?

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
As for the pitstops, there is no reason why cars cannot have large enough fuel cells to go the distance.

Valve....fuel cells are located right behind the driver's seat. So if you are thinking that F1 cars should have bigger cells, then how would they go about? expanding the width or lenght? aerodynamically not an option to be considered....

Larger fuel tanks were used, and the racing was better, before 1994.

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by TTT
-Jukebox-

Did you watch F1 before pitstops and refuelling were enforced by the rules ? If so can you justify your "tanker" remark please? Who needs grooved tyres anyway?

I was only being sarcastic

Originally posted by TTT
I did not say Kimi surrendered the lead so Michael could win, I said he "capitulated" - different word. I have the incident on video. Michael aimed his car at where Kimi's was, and Kimi drove off the track , which allowed Michael to pass. If Kimi had stayed on the track there may have been a crash, but Michael would not now have the psychological advantage next time they do battle.

Kimi swayed way off the racing line when he took the corner and Michael was on the racing line...Kimi could not get a better accelaration as a result of the oversteer and Michael was simply on the right gear to take advantage of the situation.

Originally posted by TTT
Anyway, this thread concerns how money, or IMHO how the unequal distribution of money is detrimental to the sport of F1. What do you think about that?

I have no arguements on this matter as long as Ferrari are winning

Can I suggest you buy the end of season video and don't watch the French GP through Ferrari red glasses ! - Kimi turned left onto the exit kerb because Michael was about to drive over him - Michael was perfectly entitled to (instictively) do this, but it would have been a different story if Kimi had held his line.

[NME]

My suggestions are:

NO refuelling - larger fuel tanks, NO pit strategy like we know it.
YES to one pitstop for tyres (compulsory), we would have again those fabulous 5 secs pit stops.
NO radio communication - just look at the pit board.
NO wireless data transmission - fix the car in the pit.

YES to single-tyre manufacturer (slicks or not)
YES to 3-car teams (sorry Minardi, Jordan and Sauber)
YES to saturday's superpole (like in the FIA GT)

YES to free digital TV (that will allow better TV time distribution - more exposure/cash for all teams)
YES to heavy punishment for OBVIOUS team orders (one race ban)

I guess we dont need to kill the technology to improve F1 competitiveness. Manufacturers need the F1 tech side to sell their products in order to bring the cash in.

[AllonFS]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
Capitulating is what the Poms did in Singapore-no comparison

Absolutely no comparison. This is a bit on the offensive side, and completely irrelevant. There is no real point to this statement other than Pom bashing. Also pretty nasty to mention this in a jokey context when you consider the fate of a lot of those subsequent POWs.

[alchemy]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
You have it all wrong - just think about what you have put on the title of this thread. It is the lack of money for the lower order teams that is killing F1. We are about to lose 4 teams in 2 years for lack of money, and you talk about massive money ? Be real. Look at the teams that are hurting, not the ones at the top.

You’re just being pedantic Valve.

A budget in excess of 35 million pounds for one of the minnow teams, is hardly what can be classed as a "lack of money." It’s just that 35 mill wouldn’t keep Ferrari in pasta. But thereby hangs the tail!

As for me being "real" - the words pot, kettle and black spring to mind here.

[ASCII Man]

Originally posted by TTT
-Jukebox-

I did not say Kimi surrendered the lead so Michael could win, I said he "capitulated" - different word. I have the incident on video. Michael aimed his car at where Kimi's was, and Kimi drove off the track , which allowed Michael to pass. If Kimi had stayed on the track there may have been a crash, but Michael would not now have the psychological advantage next time they do battle.

There was oil on the track, which kimi didn't see(no red yellow flag waved), so that "mistake" was not really kimi's fault in the first place.
But MS's passing was legitimate though because Kimi was off the track when he passed him...

[Valve Bounce]

The costs of developing an F1 car to the point where they are reasonably competitive is too high - I agree. But the top teams get more money because they are up there. How about if the money was evenly distributed, and we cut out most of the electronics? That should bring the costs down.
Alchemy - I don't have to get real. Look at my nick If I don't post rubbish here, who's going to post the sensible stuff?

When did I say Michael's move was not legitimate ? Yes, before Michael took the lead, Kimi went wide due to the oil BUT he had rejoined the circuit and was on the racing line when Michael intimidated him off the track - watch the video.

[Valve Bounce]

Originally posted by Jukebox


Valve....fuel cells are located right behind the driver's seat. So if you are thinking that F1 cars should have bigger cells, then how would they go about? expanding the width or lenght? aerodynamically not an option to be considered....

You're not a lateral thinker, are you? Just hire a shorter driver and move the seat forward.

[Lee Janotta]

Cripes Valve, they're already hiring midgets...

Give the teams a couple years notice, but yeah, tell them they're going to have to go the whole race without refuelling. Perhaps mandate a wider chassis to make room for the fuel cell?

To get back to the original point of this thread... Yes, the money is a major problem. How do we fix it?

Well, let's look at the TV money, for one thing... Why do the already rich teams get _more_ money than the struggling teams? Let's distribute it evenly among the non-works to keep them going.

I've already made my real cost-cutting suggestions, though. Customer chassis and spec electronics will allow the small teams to make _huge_ cuts in R&D. The spec electronics will also allow some smaller cuts at the large teams.

And I've suggested tough restrictions on testing, and still stand by those suggestions.

I'd also like to repeat my suggestion for a compromise on three-car teams: Expand the grid to 30 cars, and allow wildcards, one-offs, and give each _manufacturer_ the option of entering a third car in 4 races per season. Also, relax the Super Liscense requirements. Anyone holding an International Liscense and who can qualify on Saturday should be handed a _provisional_ Super Liscense on the spot. If we get too many entries, the cars qualifying at the back of the grid could draw starting positions by lottery and get sent out in a ten-lap qualifying race on Saturday.

And yes, we will need harsh penalties to deal with team orders. The FIA looks pretty damn impotent right now.

[alchemy]

Originally posted by TTT
Any driver used to winning (e.g. Kimi pre F1) will not be over the moon when he finishes in 2nd place because of his own error. Look at his body language in the post race interview.

TTT, I’m sure there are a zillion drivers out there would have been delighted to have finished 2nd for whatever reason.

As regards being "used to winning". The mark of character is not how you handle success, but how you handle failure! e.g Troy Bayliss not just after losing a race but losing the World Superbike title. He was magnificent.

Sorry - but I think Kimi is yet another ‘prima donna’ I can do without!

[JGM]

I've often thought that one of the best things that could happen to F1(from our point of view) would be a complete and total financial collapse. It wouldn't be the end of F1. The racers would still be there and they would still go racing, albeit in a much cheaper way and at a slightly slower speed. The main effect would be to clear out all the politicians, the poseurs, the hangers-on, the beautiful people, the men-in-suits etc etc. It would be like it was thirty or forty years ago - just racing without all the bull**** and without NASA technology.

[Valve Bounce]

Well JGM, part of F1 is heading that way very fast, and that may trigger a collapse. Just suppose Jordan and Minardi fail next year, Peter Sauber's backers finally realise that he will never win a race without works backing and quit. Then there will only be the 7 works teams, and just suppose that the anti-smoking putsche get their way worldwide and the tobacco companies realise they are not going to get any exposure by pouring money for nothing, so Marlborough and West quit. The remaining Works cars need to spend even more money to try to beat each other and the non winners like Jaguar and Baronda give it away. Then the rest say they are running around in circles in a depleted field, the television audience disappear (The UK alone lost 5 million viewers this year), and there is no longer any point in carrying on as only three of the teams really have any chance of winning and the other teams switch to Le mans type cars. F1 dies.

[J.McClane]

Yes, big money is ruinin' F1.
My suggestion for this (as i have said before) is to limit the teams as to how much money they can spend.
It would be like playin' them fantasy F1 games you see, but for real.
they can spend the money on whatever they like (within the rules), but it would mean they have to be much more carefull on what they spend it on.