[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[bella]

i bet he decided there and then on the spot when asked by a journalist that they had special dispensation. if the journo had asked "and of course those teams will be penalised heavily for non-participation to ensure the integrity of the f1 product won't they?" he'd have said of course. journo probably said "you're not going to compound their problems by handing them a financial penalty they're never going to be able to pay are you?"

[paddy]

I thought BE was appalling when interviewed by Ted Kravitz yesterday. Martin Brundle looked genuinely shocked with his performance. I really think for the sake of the sport him buying himself out of the german courtroom was a bit of a disaster. He hasn't got an original thought in his head and sounds like a man years past his best. His stock answers are to turn the clock back and insult the small teams. I think F1 will be finished in a couple of years if it doesn't reinvigorate it's management and leadership. Whatever Bernie says people will not be interested in fourteen car grids which could well be the case next year.

[JeremySmith]

So dbl points being rewarded at Abu Dhabi are lurking in the background now.. I hate this 2014 rule...

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by paddy

I thought BE was appalling when interviewed by Ted Kravitz yesterday. Martin Brundle looked genuinely shocked with his performance. I really think for the sake of the sport him buying himself out of the german courtroom was a bit of a disaster. He hasn't got an original thought in his head and sounds like a man years past his best. His stock answers are to turn the clock back and insult the small teams. I think F1 will be finished in a couple of years if it doesn't reinvigorate it's management and leadership. Whatever Bernie says people will not be interested in fourteen car grids which could well be the case next year.

Simply shocking interview, he sounded clueless, that has to be part of a game with Bernie.. I can not believe that a man that runs FOM has such little to say, and that was when he was facing the mic...

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Simply shocking interview, he sounded clueless, that has to be part of a game with Bernie.. I can not believe that a man that runs FOM has such little to say, and that was when he was facing the mic...

When I've seen him interviewed in the past, he does like to play this game of being evasive with the interviewer but this time, he really came across as having absolutely no idea as to why he was being interviewed in the first place; it was cringe worthy. If I was a potential sponsor, looking to possibly get into F1, I would think twice.

[JeremySmith]

It was like trying to interview a person with dementia ...

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

It was like trying to interview a person with dementia ...

I think he has got dementia.

[wolfhound]

How many new suggestions a day come out about the future F1 rules in the last few days.
The latest is a 2 tier F1 with the top 5 teams running as are currently and the rest will have more powerful GP2 cars.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/116734

This effectively means that the back of the grid is confined to the back for ever and will not be allowed to mix it at the front of the grid but first it will have to be passed by the F1 commission, FIA etc.

Fat chance.
What is the reason for all this agend to run low cost F1 at the back of the grid with effectively 2 classes. I suspect it is so Bernie/CVC will not need to pay those teams as much.
However will this destroy F1 as the 10 or 12 best teams will no longer be competing with each other but just 4 or 5.
Most of these ideas that are appearing are totaly unrealistic and are part of another agenda but who's?.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

How many new suggestions a day come out about the future F1 rules in the last few days.
The latest is a 2 tier F1 with the top 5 teams running as are currently and the rest will have more powerful GP2 cars.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/116734

This effectively means that the back of the grid is confined to the back for ever and will not be allowed to mix it at the front of the grid but first it will have to be passed by the F1 commission, FIA etc.

Fat chance.
What is the reason for all this agend to run low cost F1 at the back of the grid with effectively 2 classes. I suspect it is so Bernie/CVC will not need to pay those teams as much.
However will this destroy F1 as the 10 or 12 best teams will no longer be competing with each other but just 4 or 5.
Most of these ideas that are appearing are totaly unrealistic and are part of another agenda but who's?.

How about this for thought:
The idea is to create fear of a crisis for the small teams so the powers that be (Regulator-FIA) will consider them but reject them for the reasons you have given.
But they are now softened up to admitting their is a problem but this isn't the solution.
The real proposal is the return of the V8's in/or customer cars for the smaller teams and a marginalisation by the bigger teams that preserves their privileges in getting the bulk of the revenues.... while preserving the championship so they don't lose the 100 year deal

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

How many new suggestions a day come out about the future F1 rules in the last few days.
The latest is a 2 tier F1 with the top 5 teams running as are currently and the rest will have more powerful GP2 cars.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/116734

This effectively means that the back of the grid is confined to the back for ever and will not be allowed to mix it at the front of the grid but first it will have to be passed by the F1 commission, FIA etc.

Fat chance.
What is the reason for all this agend to run low cost F1 at the back of the grid with effectively 2 classes. I suspect it is so Bernie/CVC will not need to pay those teams as much.
However will this destroy F1 as the 10 or 12 best teams will no longer be competing with each other but just 4 or 5.
Most of these ideas that are appearing are totaly unrealistic and are part of another agenda but who's?.

Ironically an 'upgraded GP2' car would probably be quicker than the current F1 cars...

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Moneyseeker

Ironically an 'upgraded GP2' car would probably be quicker than the current F1 cars...

But you can bet your bottom dollar that the powers that be will ensure that they will be slower.

[bella]

this super-gp2 thing is a bit tedious (current gp2 itself is a bit tedious to be fair), but i do think there's a future for some kind of 2 class f1. there's no reason it shouldn't have 2 classes, and i think it would be excellent for the other end of the f1 field to have something to chase.

i'm not sure a spec car is the way it should be done though. unless you could chop and change the engine choices, i guess that'd be another way of doing it?

[Pingguest]

Formula One has been a two-tier series before. Think about the Formula Two-cars participating in the early years, the Jim Clark Trophy and the the Colin Chapman Trophy for respectively drivers and constructors with a normally-aspirated engines in the late-eighties and the 2006 rev-limited and air restricted V10-engine used by Scuderia Toro Rosso.
All these solutions have one thing in common: they only last for a very short period of time, mostly when a final solution is already in sight.

A two-tier Formula One can only be a short-term solution - if any - as it makes the series lose it creditability. How can Formula One even claim to be the pinnacle of motor sport if not all teams participate under the same regime?

[bella]

why does it make it lose its credibility? genuine question.

[Nicholosophy]

I would happily watch two classes of open wheelers race, like they do in sportscars. F1 could be for the manufacturers and F2 for the privateers.

Actually when I think about it like that then I don't mind it much at all. As long as those who wish to run in F1 spec can, and those who don't want to/can't afford to can still run in F2 spec.

(F1 and F2 used as a differentiator only in my post)

[Paradise City]

F1 may have been two tier before and I've nothing against that in principle - I enjoy that dimension in sportscars, say - but I just don't trust these people who are running F1. It's a quick fix, a plaster, a knee-jerk reaction and a dodge without resolving anything fundamental.

[bella]

how's it a quick fix? it'd be a totally sensible way of allowing teams to run at a reasonable budget and compete for actual prizes. everyone says the leap from gp2 is too big financially, nobody really has the cash to enter at the level of the big boys. we need to keep the engineering side of f1 going, and turkeys ain't gonna vote for christmas. there is no valid way of cost capping the big boys now - horse, stable door, bolted, open. all that.

you might think it's knee jerk but actually i think the opposite. the more you think about it the more it makes sense to set up another class inside f1. it'd mean the guys at the back aren't totally subserviant to the "top class" runners too which imo is one of the great things about endurance. you've not lived till you've seen a couple of prototype cars chasing each other at full tilt through gt traffic.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bella

how's it a quick fix? it'd be a totally sensible way of allowing teams to run at a reasonable budget and compete for actual prizes. everyone says the leap from gp2 is too big financially, nobody really has the cash to enter at the level of the big boys. we need to keep the engineering side of f1 going, and turkeys ain't gonna vote for christmas. there is no valid way of cost capping the big boys now - horse, stable door, bolted, open. all that.

you might think it's knee jerk but actually i think the opposite. the more you think about it the more it makes sense to set up another class inside f1. it'd mean the guys at the back aren't totally subserviant to the "top class" runners too which imo is one of the great things about endurance. you've not lived till you've seen a couple of prototype cars chasing each other at full tilt through gt traffic.

It would be a solution to the promoters (100 year commercial rights) problem re the numbers.
If it was a solution to a problem that was not around money and created by the present agreements re remuneration, then it would be a solution that would have a goal in sight. And an end when it was not required because balance had returned to the scene. But when it is a solution to a man created problem around an imbalance and discord (greed) it becomes a disruptive incident and supports iniquity and corruption and will corrupt the sporting character of F1.

Using F2 in the 50's was a temporary solution because it enable a competition to be run while facing a lack of entries. Allowing F2 to run at the Nurburgring in 1967/68 was to boost the number of cars on a vey long circuit in a time when there were barely 14-16 cars.
The Jim Clark Cup for atmospheric 3.5 cars was an interim solution during the change from 3.5 litres to all turbo 1.5 engines to cover established constructors who didn't have a turbo supplier, and equivalency was used again in the transition back to atmospheric engines at the end of the turbo era.

This solution is different. It is the solution to a commercial situation that allows the commercial rights holder to establish a financial hierarchy within the regulations that results in a hegemony for a select few who's membership of that group does not rely on success in the competition but on commercial arrangements with the commercial rights holder.
It is based on something that is the very antithesis of free, open, transparent competition and rewards those selected few disproportionately to the balance of the competitors.

If the rewards system was open and transparent there would not be any need for a second tier... The present system is also corrupt because it does not allow the regulator to regulate the series without interference and veto from the commercial rights holder or the participants. It actually nobbles the regulator and maybe the EU commission should be looking at that.

[Paradise City]

Originally Posted by bella

how's it a quick fix? it'd be a totally sensible way of allowing teams to run at a reasonable budget and compete for actual prizes. everyone says the leap from gp2 is too big financially, nobody really has the cash to enter at the level of the big boys. we need to keep the engineering side of f1 going, and turkeys ain't gonna vote for christmas. there is no valid way of cost capping the big boys now - horse, stable door, bolted, open. all that.

you might think it's knee jerk but actually i think the opposite. the more you think about it the more it makes sense to set up another class inside f1. it'd mean the guys at the back aren't totally subserviant to the "top class" runners too which imo is one of the great things about endurance. you've not lived till you've seen a couple of prototype cars chasing each other at full tilt through gt traffic.

I've extolled multi-class formula in my remark above. I'm not sure what I make of this proposed "F1" as a cobbled together Grand-Am Hi-tech-low-tech-CART-lite though.

Instead of doing the heavy lifting of actually governing and overhauling the sport with lasting reforms that preserved the essence of F1 - which I think could be done by a diligently policed regime of price and technology controls - they've shrugged their shoulders and seem to be taking the easy route by flooding the grid with inferior F1 cars. I get it the writing is on the wall with this stuff but I don't like it and don't like the governing body has basically admitted that it is a failed institution. That's why it's a dodge.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

This solution is different. It is the solution to a commercial situation that allows the commercial rights holder to establish a financial hierarchy within the regulations that results in a hegemony for a select few who's membership of that group does not rely on success in the competition but on commercial arrangements with the commercial rights holder.

It is based on something that is the very antithesis of free, open, transparent competition and rewards those selected few disproportionately to the balance of the competitors.

i respect your opinion but i think you're vastly overanalysing the whole thing. obviously there's problems with the series commercially, but ultimately people don't give a flying crap any more about formula one. changing that is going to take changes from every direction.

and frankly, there's far too much guff about the off-track stuff. so very, very bored of whinging and moaning about that now, i know it's easy and people find that easiest, but we're a forum, let's use the ability to make long wordy statements to actually brainstorm a bit. we all know the commercial structure is wrong. this is about how to fix stuff beyond that.

[Casper]

Can you imagine the first hissy fit when a GP2 car causes one of the big boys to miss pole or a place on the podium by getting in the way. Horner would have a coronory on the spot.

[bella]

...but the cameras would be too busy looking for ginger spice for a reaction shot

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bella

i respect your opinion but i think you're vastly overanalysing the whole thing. obviously there's problems with the series commercially, but ultimately people don't give a flying crap any more about formula one. changing that is going to take changes from every direction.

and frankly, there's far too much guff about the off-track stuff. so very, very bored of whinging and moaning about that now, i know it's easy and people find that easiest, but we're a forum, let's use the ability to make long wordy statements to actually brainstorm a bit. we all know the commercial structure is wrong. this is about how to fix stuff beyond that.

Maybe there's nothing wrong with it beyond the commercial structure.
If F1 is about technology then the current formula is fine. It is what the manufacturers want so if you go away from it you forsake manufacturer involvement. The ills of the current commercial structure have created the present situation.

Then you are left with what? Do you want to go to 1980's constructors around a common engine? SuperGP2? something like Indycar or 1990's CART (which was funded on the back of engine manufacturers and the tobacco industry )

If it is just entertainment what is going to make it distinct from any other formula? What will make it the pinnacle? Money? No. That will not work. Its not working now....

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by bella

...but the cameras would be too busy looking for ginger spice for a reaction shot

Mrs Horner sits in the corner bitting her nails away ...

[JeremySmith]

I am using my phone to post so I won't go into too
much detail, but I agree with bella, a two tier system is not a bad idea for F1, think
of how exciting the racing could be !
It will allow smaller less funded teams to race with the big boys as money wise they never be able to compete with them anyway, ever ...