|
Come on, don't be facetious. National series will always be more flexible than international series, given the much higher running costs (mainly travel). I actually think you're being kind to the ACO with regards to the chassis - the timing was always suspicious, given Oreca just-happened to have a headstart on a prototype chassis - but nobody can change this now.
I remember saying this the last time someone else lamented the state of LMP2, so at the risk of repeating myself:
Almost everyone here would go back to the 2014-2016 regulations in a heartbeat, if it was on offer. It provided racing as good as we see now, the inherent uncertainty due to the variety in chasses and engines, and it kept costs reasonable (to quote Hindhaugh/Collins, "Cost-cutting that actually cuts costs!") But it isn't, and, like it or not, there is an abundance of entries for all ACO LMP2-based series, so the teams have come to terms with the change.
You could rightly argue that the ACO holds the trump card (Le Mans entries), but post-2017 the majority of teams have been genuinely enthusiastic, daresay preferred, the stability and certainty of the 2017-onwards regulations. It fits in with the wider push from the ACO for technological development to be limited to the top classes, and really only for the factory-backed teams, which I do not agree with, but I think is outside the scope of this discussion.
Many of us have decided to respect/tolerate that choice as it brings more cars to the track and improves the on-track spectacle (closer racing, better reliability). It does not mean we agree with decisions made, but if the choice is fewer cars on track, it's not hard to see why fans would prefer the option that populates the grid. If anyone disagrees to the point that they do not want to watch, this is also valid. Yes, those fans aren't here anymore, and I sincerely hope that they are enjoying their new pursuits.
|