planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:05 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 674
I think that the top 3 teams should pay a certain amount to the bottom 3 or 4 teams to field a 3rd car.

Logistically I have no idea how or if it would work, I just like the idea.

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23760
It just needs a fairer redistribution of revenue so 13 teams can compete without fear of bankruptcy and be reasonably competitive, why do teams with loads of money need to be paid money just to turn up?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7777
Yellowbin74 wrote:
I think that the top 3 teams should pay a certain amount to the bottom 3 or 4 teams to field a 3rd car.

Logistically I have no idea how or if it would work, I just like the idea.



They don't need to actually'pay' them anything, just not lake a huge slice each from the overall amount just for being there.

There should be enough money available for the bottom teams to keep going as long as they are there and within the famous 107%. They should then be able to work on getting their own points to earn money to build a better car to earn points ...etc

At the moment it is costing them lots of money just to turn up, and as they are not guaranteed to break even and be there next year they can not borrow money on the strength of it so can not build a better...etc.

=Logistically I have no idea how or if it would work, I just like the idea< How about they have to supply the 3 bottom teams with free engines? The teams don't get to chose, FIA do


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9685
Location: Ireland
As many cars as possible. More seats = more opportunities for drivers to get in the door and make a name for themselves. And now with the FIA's mandatory points to qualify for a Super Licence, the back end of the grid wouldn't consist of wealthy also rans

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 8865
As many as the regulations allow as that means the sport is healthy

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 387
moby wrote:
mmi16 wrote:
wolfticket wrote:
Herb wrote:
26.

And reduce the barriers to entry. If you can build a car to the regulations, even if only one, you should be allowed to turn up and have a crack. We have the 107% rule to stop unsafe cars qualifying.

Thinking of it, it was probably the introduction of the 107% rule that once and for all killed the "build a car and have a crack" mentality that meant big grids and necessitated pre-qualifying. If you were allowed to drive round 3-6 seconds of the pace on a minimal budget, either out of racing spirit or as a mobile billboard, people probably still would.


Having ineffective power plants are what put cars over 107%. Remember Williams started their existence as one of the back markers and worked themselves to be WCC & WDC and also worked their way back to mid-pack runners. McLaren's experience with Honda shows what happens when a perennial front runner gets the wrong power unit in the car. By the way on a 1:40 lap time the 107% time is 7 seconds back. F1 is trying to reign in the costs of competition, lowering the bar to the Old Boys Club will assist in the effort.


Manor had a Merc engine and Sauber a Ferrari engine. :D


Current Spec? - NFW

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 387
BackwardsInFlames wrote:
20-22.

For every Minardi or Onyx who pull the occasional shock result, you end with a Fondmental or Andrea Moda or Lola who have no right being on the grid. There needs to be a threshold.

BS - If you get the car to the grid - YOU BELONG THERE!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 446
pokerman wrote:
It just needs a fairer redistribution of revenue so 13 teams can compete without fear of bankruptcy and be reasonably competitive, why do teams with loads of money need to be paid money just to turn up?



:thumbup: :thumbup:

Imo that is the main issue in F1 that discourages new teams from joining. No one wants to make a huge investment into building an F1 team for the governing body itself to not help keep the teams it has with a better money distribution.

_________________
PF1 pick 10
2016: 7th (1 win, 4 podiums)
Awards: Sergio perez trophy & Podium specialist
PF1 pick 3
2015: constructors 2nd, singles 5th


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 674
moby wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
I think that the top 3 teams should pay a certain amount to the bottom 3 or 4 teams to field a 3rd car.

Logistically I have no idea how or if it would work, I just like the idea.



They don't need to actually'pay' them anything, just not lake a huge slice each from the overall amount just for being there.

There should be enough money available for the bottom teams to keep going as long as they are there and within the famous 107%. They should then be able to work on getting their own points to earn money to build a better car to earn points ...etc

At the moment it is costing them lots of money just to turn up, and as they are not guaranteed to break even and be there next year they can not borrow money on the strength of it so can not build a better...etc.

=Logistically I have no idea how or if it would work, I just like the idea< How about they have to supply the 3 bottom teams with free engines? The teams don't get to chose, FIA do


Or just take the extra one hundred million that Ferrari get. Job done. :)

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group