How to fix F1?

[P38 in workshop]

This might be a bit tangential to the general line of this discussion but I feel it is related.I know that Pitpass.com isn't always held in high regard in these parts and often for good reason they did publish this article earlier https://www.pitpass.com/65878/Could-...ge-teams-image .It deserves a few moments of your time as it makes it less likely that images of cars will be circulated and that eyeballs will be exposed to the liveries the entrants have chosen to highlight the identities and trade names of the sponsors.The whole purpose of sponsorship is to get the names of the sponsors displayed to the greatest number of people and imposing barriers and costs will tend to limit that exposure.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

This might be a bit tangential to the general line of this discussion but I feel it is related.I know that Pitpass.com isn't always held in high regard in these parts and often for good reason they did publish this article earlier https://www.pitpass.com/65878/Could-...ge-teams-image .It deserves a few moments of your time as it makes it less likely that images of cars will be circulated and that eyeballs will be exposed to the liveries the entrants have chosen to highlight the identities and trade names of the sponsors.The whole purpose of sponsorship is to get the names of the sponsors displayed to the greatest number of people and imposing barriers and costs will tend to limit that exposure.

After reading that article, it became apparent this the same problem that is pervasive on YouTube. You upload the content you own, then YouTube looks for matching videos or audio. Then if they find a match, they let the person who uploaded the offending video what is going on. I think typically any advertisement revenue is redirected to the IP owner.

At least that is how it is supposed to work.

What can happen is that the matching algorithm may not work very well. I uploaded a personal video of an in-car lap (me driving) at the nurburgring a few years ago. Then years later was told I had stolen the content from someone else. As you might expect, two different cars running on the nurburgring in similar lighting conditions might create videos that look the same to an AI system. Or you might have someone who just claims ownership just to see if they can extract payment from those who might not realize they are being scammed. Such as claiming ownership of music that was provided license free in editing software for people to use in their own videos.

I would almost bet money that what has happened in this example is that Motorsports Images has a huge library of images that they have accumulated both by acquisition of other libraries and own their own. But buried in this large library is images that were downloaded directly from teams, just like pitpass did. Motorsports Images think they own exclusive rights to their entire library, but maybe they don't.

Then Motorsports Images uploaded their entire library to ImageRights. ImageRights then searches the web for anything that matches and starts to sends out bills. It becomes a lot of work to prove innocence. And I "think" many of the laws that deal with this effectively assume you are guilty until you can prove your innocence. Or at a minimum, require jumping through hoops to make it go away.

In the end, this is not an F1 problem. This is a pervasive problem across multiple industries.

Richard

[Tourer]

Agree Richard.

I would imagine that IP could also get quite complicated when the images are of an individual car, team or driver, in that even though photographer X took the photo, there wouldn't be a photo to take if the team didn't exist so maybe the team has some rights as well. Then there are rights held by the owners of the series as well.

I know for example that with Supercars here in Oz, any photographer requiring accreditation has to sign over at least partial IP rights to the Supercars organisation and that there is an arrangement between Supercars and the teams that Supercars can use images of a group of cars or teams as much as it likes but if the images are of a single driver or team there is some kind of approval and/or IP sharing arrangement with the team concerned.

I don't believe that Motorsport Images necessarily acknowledges any of that automatically and it certainly sounds like there is some hard ball being played with pitpass in this case - maybe only some legal argument would resolve that and no doubt Liberty may well have something to say in any such argument regarding F1.

Sidenote, I emailed Motorsport Images myself about a small number of images in its library of cars where I'd been a crew member, asking for access to the images for my own personal use, made it clear not commercial. No reply, tried again, same. Not bitter about it but the company clearly takes a pretty firm line on it owning everything as a starting position.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I believe it's the Australian S5000 series. Spec Formula 3 cars with production based Ford v8 putting out a bit under 600HP.

Might be interesting, but understand these are not throwback F5000. They are modern cars (halo device, etc)

Richard

Speaking of which.

The S5000 cars look pretty good, sound excellent and can race one another!

https://motorsport.tv/motorsporttv/video/s5000-sandown-feature-race/27607 Start 20 mins in.

Qualifying heat 2

https://motorsport.tv/motorsporttv/video/s5000-sandown-qualifying-heat-2/27604 Start 10 mins in.

Properly managed, I think this series will have legs.

Relatively cheap, powerful, fast, safe and a handful to drive, not much not to like.

[Adam43]

A surefire success. They are saying as much in the Aussie forum.

[Richard C]

So I have run across something interesting a few times recently and wasn't sure where to share my thoughts. I think this might be a good place as overall what I am talking about is something I think that is going right with F1 right now.

Below is a quote that caught my eye from the 2020 Belgium thread

Originally Posted by Greem

I was talking to my 16yo son earlier (who's been pulled into F1 by watching Norris on Twitch).

My own 18 year old son has until very recently had zero interest in F1. But that all changed recently when he ran across Lando Norris on social media. I am not talking Twitter, Instagram, etc. but rather Lando streaming other computer games. Basically games that are popular with his age group/cohort via platforms that are also popular with that same group.

This interest has resulted in him buying and playing both the 2019 and 2020 F1 games and now he wants to watch qualifying and racing with me. I am also now finding I can talk to him about current F1 topics and he is clearly following the sport AND enjoying it.

I assume that Max brought in a huge wave of Dutch fans and I think Norris is stealthily bringing in another group. And while Norris might be the gateway drug, it seems others like Charles LeClerc, George Russell and Alex Albon (plus some F2 drivers) are part of this.

It wasn't included in the official F1 pre-race interview highlights, but Lando was asked in his interview about a currently popular game that he plays. He was clearly caught off guard about the question, but I think this is an indication that the crossover has legs. I don't think this is some "plan" by Lando, but rather Lando just being "Lando". And a new generation is finding it entertaining.

Below is a thread on Reddit regarding Lando being asked about his opinion of the game "Fall Guys" (it includes video of the interview)

https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/co...ys_in_prerace/

Richard

[Greem]

So. Many. Parallels!

My lad has been to events with me at Donington and Rockingham (before it closed). He used to watch F1 races when he was a lot younger, because that's what we did of a Sunday afternoon if I was at home.

He still recalls me bouncing all over the room after the finish of Hamilton's first WDC but I scared him because I was too loud!

After years of not really being bothered, he's now immersed in fantasy F1 competitions and watches Q and the race every weekend, something I tend not to manage these days.

The younger drivers are very definitely bringing their own crowds. More power to their elbows!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

If you watch footage from the early 90s, cars can follow closer there than they can now.

I bring up your post not to state you are wrong, but in connection to something I saw from Karun Chandhok earlier and the fact you mention the '90s.

He was talking about how F1 today is criticised for being boring, and comparing it to a historical result - particularly the 1993 Italian GP. I regularly hear how people say that the racing was better in the '90s, and that they long for those days to return.

It will be interesting to see how people would have judged the Italian GP of 1993 with the Italian GP of 2020 - with results such as below:

[Adam43]

Sodemo’s point concerns whether cars can follow each other closely and race. Chandhok’s tweet is about how competitive (and reliable) the field is.

Both relevant to the boringness of F1, but distinct aspects too it.

[Knowlesy]

There is no doubt cars could follow a bit more closely back then than they do today. Though if you listen to commentary of the races or read articles of the time they actually make the exact same complaints as they do now!

[S griffin]

Autosport recently reproduced a discussion they did in 95 featuring various people in F1, all discussing how improve the F1 product, showing some things don’t change

There was a very good point by Roebuck in that piece. He mentioned when he saw the 1973 German GP on the telly, although it was a Tyrrell walkover, the spectacle of seeing the way they were go round the Nordschleife was great. I have to agree there, overtaking and all that shouldn’t be the be all and end all, it should be enough of a spectacle without it.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I bring up your post not to state you are wrong, but in connection to something I saw from Karun Chandhok earlier and the fact you mention the '90s.

He was talking about how F1 today is criticised for being boring, and comparing it to a historical result - particularly the 1993 Italian GP. I regularly hear how people say that the racing was better in the '90s, and that they long for those days to return.

It will be interesting to see how people would have judged the Italian GP of 1993 with the Italian GP of 2020 - with results such as below:

Shame you didn't post the complete box score, as that includes the number of retirements, which was 12 out of a field of 26 starters. That shows how much more attritional racing was back then compared to now.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Autosport recently reproduced a discussion they did in 95 featuring various people in F1, all discussing how improve the F1 product, showing some things don’t change

There was a very good point by Roebuck in that piece. He mentioned when he saw the 1973 German GP on the telly, although it was a Tyrrell walkover, the spectacle of seeing the way they were go round the Nordschleife was great. I have to agree there, overtaking and all that shouldn’t be the be all and end all, it should be enough of a spectacle without it.

How do you have a spectacle in the 'pinnacle' of motor racing without overtaking? The Nordschleife was a totally different animal to the tracks they race on today, like the old Spa... It took XXL gonads to drive either circuit at full tilt - and usually in the rain and fog....

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Shame you didn't post the complete box score, as that includes the number of retirements, which was 12 out of a field of 26 starters. That shows how much more attritional racing was back then compared to now.

I was focusing more on the lack of competition amongst the field - however yes the attrition rate also tells a story.

I guess there is a bit of a balance. There can be an interest generated from a potential reliability issue - and this can definitely add to the narrative of a race.
But personally, if nearly half the field end up retiring I feel that there is definitely something wrong. I'd rather see 80% plus of the field finish a race with few overtakes than see retirements deciding results in such a manner.

[Aysedasi]

I agree, but as we've said before, the ultra-reliability of the cars these days has had a pronounced effect upon the spectacle. Drivers having to nurse cars home or adjust strategies due to the fragility of components was always an intrinsic part of the spectacle and the almost complete loss of that has changed F1 completely. How often these days do you see an engine go bang....?

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

How do you have a spectacle in the 'pinnacle' of motor racing without overtaking? The Nordschleife was a totally different animal to the tracks they race on today, like the old Spa... It took XXL gonads to drive either circuit at full tilt - and usually in the rain and fog....

For me have cars that are more on the edge, that way you’ll see the driver’s artistry more in effect. Easier said than done though...

[crmalcolm]

Has reliability gone too far the other way? Maybe - an element of uncertainty over the ability of a car to complete the race can add interest.

On a personal level, I'm not sure I would like to see a car 'nursed' to a finish if it was so slow as a result that it dropped significantly down the order. However, when the cars have to lower their performance marginally to keep running it can add excitement.

I've seen opinions raised on both sides here. There are posts where individual have complained about drivers having to 'nurse their tyres', and others praising the spectacle of watching someone 'nurse their tyres'.

I'm not sure where the exact balance lies - or whether it is just the F1 fan's inclination to object about certain aspects. It feels sometimes like the teams are being criticised (as part of the regulations) for designing cars that are too reliable for the sport, whereas Pirelli are criticised for designing tyres that are not reliable enough.

I think the reason we see less engines going bang is due to that fact that they are so closely monitored nowadays. At the slightest inclination that something is not right, the drivers are instructed to reduce the engine load, or retire the car to prevent damage.
I wonder if there is any merit in reducing the amount of real-time monitoring of the car that a team is permitted to do? If they were restricted to having a delay on their analysis of data, this would mean there was more reliance on drivers' feedback of how the engine feels. An exception would be for safety-critical features, but otherwise introduce more 'fog-of-war' to the banks of personnel track-side.

[Greem]

Bearing in mind that this thread was woken up by Richard after I mentioned my son suddenly being interested in F1, the discussion about "how it used to be better" is way wide of the mark.

Watching the Spa race, I was mostly fairly underwhelmed. My son, however, was pretty well gobsmacked at several things:

1. The speed
2. The speed through corners
3. The grip levels in corners making (2) possible
4. The acceleration
5. The deceleration

Now bearing in mind that I've spent a sizeable amount of time up close and (in a couple of cases at least!) fairly close to F1 (modern and historic), LMP1, LMP2, LMP3, GT, touring cars of all shapes and sizes etc etc doing what they do best - going quickly - I'm perhaps a bit jaded but I do appreciate the speed/power and all that. That's why I keep doing what I do!

He however has been finding the stats utterly mind-bending, and if I look at them with a dispassionate non-jaded eye, so do I. Braking from 205mph at the end of the Kemmel Straight down to less than 80mph for the turn-in to Les Combes, in less than 50 meters, and similarly at the Bus Stop; that's nothing short of breath-taking.

So remember while we're all looking back with rose-tinted spectacles, we _need_ the new fans to keep that hair-on-the-neck feeling about how F1 is now. In 10 years or so they might look back at this era the way we all do at our favourite eras, which (as I've written before) usually tally with the years following us starting to watch it. Let's not put them off!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I was focusing more on the lack of competition amongst the field - however yes the attrition rate also tells a story.

I guess there is a bit of a balance. There can be an interest generated from a potential reliability issue - and this can definitely add to the narrative of a race.
But personally, if nearly half the field end up retiring I feel that there is definitely something wrong. I'd rather see 80% plus of the field finish a race with few overtakes than see retirements deciding results in such a manner.

When I first started following F1 in the '70s, attrition was as big factor in the race. Not wanting to sound too clichéd, it was man and machine vs. man and machine. It was driver ability as well as engine and mechanical reliability and it had a random element to it.

These days, with engine and mechanical reliability so vastly improved, having the whole field finish a race and particularly a processional race, isn't that interesting, afaic.

[NaBUru38]

In the Schumacher days, I didn't care if there was little passing. I rooted for him, so whenever he won I would be happy.


Today I don't have a clear favourite F1 driver, and I'm more focused on overtaking. With DRS, I get bored quickly.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

In the Schumacher days, I didn't care if there was little passing. I rooted for him, so whenever he won I would be happy.


Today I don't have a clear favourite F1 driver, and I'm more focused on overtaking. With DRS, I get bored quickly.

Opposites are strange aren't they. I always laughed like a drain when he had a problem. Same in the Prost and Senna days when Prost had problems. Silly really. Strangely though, I don't feel that way about Hamilton's dominance. Not that I'm a fan of the man, per se (not much at all, in fact) but there is a sheer brilliance at work there. I suppose Schuey was the same, but I didn't feel the same about say, Vettel in his years of dominance.

[P38 in workshop]

I think a lot of the tedium that has crept in is because of the length of time the teams have to prepare their new designs.By the time a car is standing on it's own wheels it will have been simulated to death and ought to be 100% reliable.Because of the stability of the rules there is always a tendency for gaps to diminish as all design teams gravitate to small variations on the same theme.Having weight distribution mandated,along with a pitstop, prevents interesting approaches to tyre use.I'd like to see things freed up so that a bold tactician could suggest one set of hard tyres for the whole race.I also remember that back in the Goodyear era it wasn't unknown for a car to go out on 3 C's and a B-but you can't do that any more.


The computer controlled gearshifts have taken away the chance for place changing that used to occur when a shift was fumbled or a number of bad shifts had left a few teeth missing but in the interests of not destroying engines it isn't likely to change.


I really hope the 2022 regulations will allow DRS to be killed off.It can't be any fun for a driver to be sitting there thinking that a rival just behind him will be going past for no other reason than being close enough to activate a moveable aerodynamic device.Maybe there ought to be a team of FIA auditors checking accounts and if discrepancies are found with regard to the cost cap the punishment would be to lose a couple of aerodynamic appendages.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Greem

He however has been finding the stats utterly mind-bending, and if I look at them with a dispassionate non-jaded eye, so do I. Braking from 205mph at the end of the Kemmel Straight down to less than 80mph for the turn-in to Les Combes, in less than 50 meters, and similarly at the Bus Stop; that's nothing short of breath-taking.

Again it is interesting in the parallels. When my son and I watched the race we talked about the performance of the cars, especially the braking distances in those two exact location. Also it was interesting to see a bit of drifting on the turn into the chicane.

As I mentioned earlier, he is playing the F1 2020 game and as always sometimes you get a corner wrong and go off and beat yourself up over it. So whenever someone like Hamilton makes a mistake in a real race, gets it wrong and shortcuts a corner, we get a laugh because everyone is human.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Greem

Watching the Spa race, I was mostly fairly underwhelmed. My son, however, was pretty well gobsmacked at several things:

1. The speed
2. The speed through corners
3. The grip levels in corners making (2) possible
4. The acceleration
5. The deceleration

this has been something Liberty has been working on i believe. lower camera angles, more fixed cameras around the track, the wire cam over the pits, etc

all of which aimed at translating the speed and change of direction better while offering a greater sense of access. actually think, some of the sequences they had at Spa were pretty sensational. the whole track is covered by multiple angles...well with the exception of the spot where Gio went off though...classic!

and as Richard pointed out, the drivers like Lando offering their own unique views of paddock and personal life via social media.

i often wonder how people followed in the 70's? i cant imagine races were routinely broadcast in their entirety, long races over much greater race distances with a lack of cameras must have meant highlights focusing the action over a short packages were more the norm, and/or results perhaps not properly known or reported on unless one bought the following weeks autosport.

at the heart of many of these recent posts is how to make F1 more entertaining and frankly that is a hard thing to keep on top of when access has demystified the sport, 10+ of live broadcasts every GP, instant analysis by dozens of pundits and talking heads plus the online community etc etc.

and all of that happening in a time where we all have immediate access to a huge amount of other entertaining programming and/or gaming options.

even if there was nothing wrong with the sport, in order to stay relevant, there would still be a need for the sport to evolve with the times.

[tux]

Ive been giving this alot of thought, too much if im honest and ive come to the conclusion that theres no easy answer because of the money and amount of people reliant on F1 for employment. However, here is my idea.

Firstly i would get Oreca, Dallara whoever wants to do it to design some sort of a spec package of chassis, engine, suspension that can be purchased for a relatively cheap sum so that its easier & cheaper for NEW teams to enter the sport. This package would also include a BASIC aero kit that would allow the NEW team to enter the sport and be semi competitive. NEW teams that purchase this package can then design their own aero and modify these components to increase their pace. NEW teams can only use this package for a maximum of 3 season, then they need to design and build their own car or purchase components from other teams. New teams that enter with this package will have 15 "free" test days that they can use throughout the season and will also be free of engine & gearbox penalties

Scrap the HALO & implement an Indycar style aero screen

Chassis/monocoque to be built to current safety standards. - Teams can sell their Chassis/monocoque to other teams if they wish.

Front & rear suspension systems are free (2 dampers, 3 dampers, 7 dampers whatever you want) but MUST be MECHANICAL no hydraulic or electrical intervention. Track no more than 180cm (current 200cm) minimum weight 650kg with driver. 4 wheels ONLY must be rear wheel driven

Gearbox - Number of gears and ratios are free, must be MANUAL & operated by the driver by paddles. Gearbox usuage on a Friday is free, current Saturday & Sunday rules apply, Gearboxes MUST last 4 races before change. Change will result in a penalty (I dont like the current grid penalty system but not sure how else you implement penalties)

Engine - This is the hardest part. Target of 900 BHP
Manufacturers must use an engine from their current ROAD car vehicle range. This can be any size, number of valves, cylinders, fuel and NA/Turbo. Modifications can be made for increased power to bring it up to 900 BHP, reliability, lightning & strengthening of parts, increase of strengthening to enable the block to be used structurally. IF you are a manufacturer and you dont have a suitable base engine then you can design an engine from scratch BUT all other manufacturers can see your work. Engines can be sold to other teams but must be IDENTICAL between works & customers and must last 4 races before a change. Obviously theres alot more technical stuff to be worked out than that, im not that smart, someone else can come up with the details but i think you can see where im going with the regulations. (Think Ferrari taking a 488 engine as a base and modifying it or Mercedes taking an AMG GTR V8 engine)

For non manufacturers engine choice is free, not entirely sure how you do it but the idea would be to encourage companies like JUDD, AER, Cosworth etc to come up with their own designs that teams can purchase.you can purchase an engine from a manufacturer (as atm) or you can work with an engine supplier like JUDD, AER, Cosworth ETC to come up with your own engine. Suppliers who come up with their own engine (Judd, Cosworth ETC) will be able to sell the engine to other teams. Again engines must last 4 races although in the engines FIRST season there is no limit providing you can prove it NEEDS to be changed. Penalties will apply if you change an engine early (again i dont like grid penalties the idea would be to avoid these but you need a disincentive). The overall idea is to reduce cost, bring some "connection to real world super cars", reduce complexity so that engine changes/repairs can be done within 90 minutes. (See SPA P1/P2 where both HAAS cars needed new engines and spent most of the day in the garage). Anti Stall remains.

Fuel - Im not smart enough to come up with this although teams can have technical partnerships with fuel companies to come up with their own fuels. Refueling? Im not sure, i personally would be happy for refueling to come back although i appreciate that not everyone is so im not actually sure which direction to go.

Tyres - Again, id love for choice to be free because i think variety would be great but cost wise im not sure thats a smart thing so id look to keep a single spec tyre that is less sensitive to "overdriving" and can be pushed to the limit. Tyre warmers SCRAPPED

Aero - More freedom in Aero surfaces and development BUT NO active surfaces - DRS remains BUT is limited to 6 uses over the race distance. (Shorter DRS zones on tracks like SPA, Monza ETC). Ability to quick adjust Front and rear wing angles in pitstops. A target of around 30% downforce reduction.

Data - A general reduction in the amount of data available to teams and the amount of sensors fitted to cars. Id remove tyre temperature, brake temperature, tyre wear, etc sensors. Basically the driver would have to "feel" when their tyres are going away, when the brakes are overheating, workout themselves whats going on with the car in terms of driving it rather than being told by the engineer. Id keep sensors and live data for reliability.

Starts - Drivers must be in 100% control of the clutch at the start - this can be done via a hand clutch BUT must be controlled by the driver. No fancy start software or launch controls.

Testing - 2 x 3 day test at the start of the season at Barcelona & Paul Ricard. Teams get 6 "Free" days of testing at any venue between the start of the season and the end of the season BUT if you test at a track on the calendar it cannot be until AFTER the event.

General changes would be - White line is the edge of the track, Tyre warmers are gone, less DRS passes, less complexity so cars are able to be repaired quicker.

I didnt touch Hybrid systems because im not sure we need them or the extra cost and complexity is a good thing although im not sure how others feel?

For sure its not perfect, theres many holes but i just think the sport needs to be less complex, cheaper, more exciting.

Just for fun ive listed a calendar below.

Melbourne, Suzuka, Buddh International Circuit (India), Yas Marina, Istanbul, Imola, Monza, Magny Cours, Portimao, Hockenheim, Budapest, Silverstone, Spa, Zandvoort, USA, Mexico City, Sao Paulo, Montreal