Help make F1 better

[KC_BPF1]

Are you interested in helping improve the quality of racing in F1? We've put together a package of rule changes that the FIA should consider and are petitioning them to accept them.

The changes are as follows - for more detail please visit BlueprintF1.com

* Banning traction control
* Banning grooved tyres
* Reducing aerodynamic downforce to encourage overtaking
* Banning refuelling during the race to encourage overtaking
* Having a single race steward present at every event to adjudge on racing collisions (for consistency in rule implementation)
* Amending race penalties and definitions of 'incidents'
* Amending points distribution to award one point for pole
* Having grid positions decided by a qualifying sessions consisting of a single lap on low fuel (with a point awarded for pole lap as above) with running order determined by the finishing order of the previous race.
* Reducing testing and increasing the number of events per season to 20

If you agree with our proposal please sign our petition at www.petitiononline.com/BPF1/petition.html

Thanks!

[DKGandBH]

Some good points, but some are not.

I would not sign that petition as I do not agree with ALL of the recommendations, particularly

1. Banning refuelling during the race to encourage overtaking
2. Amending points distribution to award one point for pole
3. Having grid positions decided by a qualifying sessions consisting of a single lap on low fuel (with a point awarded for pole lap as above) with running order determined by the finishing order of the previous race.

BTW...the number of events per season is not a rule...

David

[KC_BPF1]

BTW...the number of events per season is not a rule...

It's article 14 of the sporting regulations: ”The maximum number of Events in the Championship is 17, the minimum is 8.”

I'm interested to hear people's reasons for and against supporting the proposals though, so any insight into why you disagree with those points would be interesting. The points are given full detail ont he website, by the way.

[DKGandBH]

OK...Here you go...
1. Banning refuelling during the race to encourage overtaking

It is a speed race, not a fuel economy event

2. Amending points distribution to award one point for pole

I just don't like this...Adds nothing to the race, drivers will always try and qualify on pole, and with the current regulation on qualifying, I don't want to see someone qualify on very low fuel and pit in the first 2 of 3 laps of the race.

3. Having grid positions decided by a qualifying sessions consisting of a single lap on low fuel (with a point awarded for pole lap as above) with running order determined by the finishing order of the previous race.

I would prefer to return to the old qualifying of 12 laps (or 6 laps in two sessions)

David

Also, they are thinking of increasing the number of races anyway...I guess they are going to change that rule.

[Aysedasi]

IMO, banning unnecessary refuelling stops would be the single greatest improvement.

[Cougar]

IMO such a petition will never work... You can change F1 as much as you like... you will never please everyone...

[KC_BPF1]

I take your point(s), DKGanBH, but try considering the rules together rather than separately. Yes, if you gave a point for pole at the moment it would be laughable because, as you say, "I don't want to see someone qualify on very low fuel and pit in the first 2 of 3 laps of the race."

But the point of our proposal is that everyone will be doing low-fuel qualifying anyway, then filling their cars with fuel for the start of the race, so this won't happen. What will happen is you'll get drivers pushing on a low-fuel lap, the odd ones making mistakes and starting out of position, then having to race to the front because they can't just hang around waiting for the pit stops.

The problem with how the FIA are going about amending the F1 rules is that they're just coming up with one or two ideas at a time - we're putting forward a package of changes that work together.

Banning refuelling would not turn F1 racing into economy driving in the manner that it did in the turbo years - look how few drivers ran out of fuel in the 1989-1993 period.

[BootsOntheSide]

There are 18 races this year anyway, so the maximum of 17 has obviously gone or been ignored for one year only - either way, in agreement with all the teams. Also, having a single steward could be dangerous because there are so many political issues as to who is chosen, and a danger of consistant bias (or at least, allegations of consistant bias).

Bannign refuelling would reduce, not increase, the amount of fuel economy driving. Today's engines are mcuh mroe fuel-efficient than in the turbo era.

[krt917]

Yes, I would support a ban on refuelling wholeheartedly. It would only produce an 'economy run' if you limited the amount of fuel you could use, like in the turbo days.

These suggestions are among the best I've seen (and are certainly better than the current proposals).

Only things I don't entirely agree with are the limit of one lap for qualifying (I liked the old system too) and 20 races seems a bit high, though neither of them are things I would argue against that much. The main 'needs' are there, if I may say!

[Kicking-back]

Vehemently opposed to giving a point for pole.

Qualifying's purpose is to set the grid for the race.

Starting at the front is the reward.

The race should be the only place you can score points.

Otherwise it's a slippery slope to the CART/NASCAR style of handing out points like confetti.

[RWC]

Nice thoughts but there is a problem...

a)the fia make the rules (er,some of them)but they are not the slightest bit interested in what you (or i) have to say.
I'm not being deliberatly defeatest-it's just the way mad moansly has allways opperated

b)The teams can object to rules (...again,some of them)
The teams are not deliberatly bad-they just don't want major changes in a hurry mostly.But they are a problem

c)Money ecclestone is robbing the sport blind.This might not seem to be related to rules at first but if the teams got to keep their own money they wouldn't mind huge changes


I don't want to dissapoint you but that's the way it is in f1 right now.The best us fans can possibly hope for is that any arguments amoung these three power groups will somehow improve things

[Aysedasi]

Originally posted by Cougar21
IMO such a petition will never work... You can change F1 as much as you like... you will never please everyone...

Very true, but my perception is that there are a lot more people who aren't pleased around these days than there used to be.....

[hubert]

The FIA and Bernie, are eventually going to get bit by all this 'reorganization.' Bernie insists on making F1 into a grander spectacle, and the FIA continues to reassert its influence, by biting the hands that feed them; i.e., the major manufactures that support the series. If they annoy ferrari, MB, BMW, Ford, etc enough times with shotgun changes in engine formulae, specs and regs the people pumping 200million/annum into Bernie's TV conglomerate, are going to pull the plug. Glitz and glamour not withstanding. (You can see this already in the dropping LMP entries @ LeMans this year -- the FIA and ACO kept going back and forth about rules WRT the LMP classes, etc and a lot of groups resigned from entry in that class.)
If F1 is reduced into another spec series, what will be the catchet from which it'll derive its appeal? Why blow 200million on a spec racer F1 car, when you can run 'lower' international series, for less, and garner equal exposure and a consistent rule book?
What the FIA, et al should be looking at doing is droping the ridiculous entry bond for upstart teams, and to make appeals possible for new entrants to buy existing chassis' from the major teams; i.e., ferrari, williams, etc.
Rather than limiting the regs, and blunting the advancement of the sport, the gov. body should look into modes of creating avenues for the teams to generate (re)circulating revenue by sale of existing technology.
To revamp the regs and specs every season is, and will continue to be, more expensive -- what F1 (and every series need) is a consistent rulebook, a longer leash on development and a means for generating independant revenue that is not dictated by the %age that the top boss (i.e., Bernie) decides to pay into the pot.
My 2 cents. (Worth much less than what you paid for them.)

[Kicking-back]

F1 has thrived without manufacturers in the past and it can again.

[hubert]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
F1 has thrived without manufacturers in the past and it can again.

Perhaps, but we've already seen what happens to the smaller beleagured teams (i.e., Prost, Simtek, Forti-Corse, etc.) when their funds begin to run low. We see Minardi as the perpetual backmarker, and now Jordan, in its limelight, is begining to falter on account of financial difficulty. However, maybe, getting the manufactures out of the game is a good idea, as it'll produce a field of backmarker cars, and will essentially slow the sport down , a lot. (kidding)

[Kicking-back]

hubert - the only reason smaller teams struggle is because the manufacturers have dramatically raised the bar with regards the costs of competing.

If everyone was in a non-manufacturer situation it would inevitably be cheaper.

[hubert]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
hubert - the only reason smaller teams struggle is because the manufacturers have dramatically raised the bar with regards the costs of competing.

If everyone was in a non-manufacturer situation it would inevitably be cheaper.

Agreed. I suppose we'll have to wait until 2007,and see who re-signs the Concorde.

[Fish_Flake]

What is really hindering F1 these days? Everybody is talking about how Formula 1 is terrible, and that there is no overtaking, but yet after nearly every race there is a thread that proclaims the return of passing to the championship. Furthermore, most of the people in this forum would agree that the most exciting race this season was at Monaco, where overtaking is practically impossible. The real problem with Formula 1 is that Michael Schumacher is always winning, and he wins by not bothering to challenge his opponents to race on the track, but by waiting for when his competitors are in the pits, then make a few very fast laps to blow away his competition. Especially now, when three-stop pit strategies are the norm, Schumacher is making the races look routine: other teams and other drivers might keep up with Schumacher for one stop and maybe even two, but Michael will always drive away with a sizable lead after three pit stops.

I am against banning all refueling in an attempt to keep the drivers (notably Michael Schumacher) on the track, because then the tire companies will only develop a tire that will only last for a period that would require multiple pit stops. I say, allow only one pit stop for tires and fuel over the course of a race distance. Any additional service will result in a ten-second penalty. Exceptions to this rule would include mechanical adjustments that do not include adding fuel and tires, and the occurance of a tire failure.

Other than that, I really see no problem with the sport's regulations right now. The only complaint I have is that the situation with pit stops gives a colossal advantage to Michael Schumacher's risk-eliminating race strategy.

[hubert]

Originally posted by Fish_Flake
The real problem with Formula 1 is that Michael Schumacher is always winning, and he wins by not bothering to challenge his opponents to race on the track, but by waiting for when his competitors are in the pits, then make a few very fast laps to blow away his competition.

The only complaint I have is that the situation with pit stops gives a colossal advantage to Michael Schumacher's risk-eliminating race strategy.

I do , clearly, see how this calculated sort of strategized racing could make winning in F1 akin to solving an equation; however, I do not believe that MS/Ferrari should be faulted for exploiting their strenghts as a team. If the other front - runners could more consistently, match MS's pace, then he couldn't rely on his tactic of waiting for the other to pit, and then snapping off a series of fast outlaps - it wouldn't work. Everyone's aware of MS's ability to do this, and I'm pretty sure they're trying to exploit it, but it's the other teams that have to raise the bar, get their cars closer and hound MS until he pits and put the wood to him that way. Until then, the races will be (to a point) decided in the pits. Fact is, BAR, McLaren and Renault still need to find those last 10ths. Once they do, you'll see strategy change.

[GP Racer]

Originally posted by Cougar21
IMO such a petition will never work... You can change F1 as much as you like... you will never please everyone...

Very true.

We can all talk until we're blue in the face, about THE changes that are going to make F1 "great again". But the fact of the matter is, every series ever created, put's on great races and bad races. No set of rules is going to make every F1 race a great one. There isn't a rule book you could write to make that happen. There will still be races that are boring processions, followed by a helluva of a great race, followed by another bore, followed by another...and so on and so on.

There simply is no one set of rules to create the perfect series...

[KC_BPF1]

I do , clearly, see how this calculated sort of strategized racing could make winning in F1 akin to solving an equation; however, I do not believe that MS/Ferrari should be faulted for exploiting their strenghts as a team.

I definitely agree - you can't put a set of rules together that can guarantee brilliant racing all the time, unless you're willing to serioualy 'dumb down' the sport (NASCAR, IRL).

But I stand by my assertion that if you banned refuelling and had one-lap low-fuel qualifying you'd be more likely to see good racing. We've seen from plenty of pre-qual sessions this year that the best car over a race distance (Ferrari) isn't necessarily the best over a single lap. It was certainly the case when Montoya strung his consecutive pole streak together in 2002.

Plus, towards the end of a season a championship-minded driver might be more inclined to be conservative on his single qualifying lap so as not to qualify last, further provoking the chance for racing.

But the present system, which only seems to award 'clever' (i.e. tedious) strategising, is clearly flawed.

[Kicking-back]

KC_BPF1 - spot on.

Single lap qualifying with low fuel, then race with no refuelling is definitely the way to go.

[KC_BPF1]

KC_BPF1 - spot on.

Cheers! I'm going to have to plug the petition at you though :-)

http://www.petitiononline.com/BPF1/petition.html

[Kicking-back]

I agree on those two points - but not everything on the petition, so I won't be signing it!

[Sodemo]

I agree on some points, but these are things people have been saying for years, increasingly so since 1997.

These Are my rules:

- Bring back wide 1993 slicks
- Return the cars to 200mm width
- Restrict the rear wing to a single (flat) minimum surface area of a given dimension.
- Ban refuelling
- Increase the weight of the cars to 700kg and increase the minimum weight of the engine block.
- Massively reduce the size of the rear diffuser
- Ban the wooden plank