Tufty wrote:
I'm making a point of not taking sides here, merely helping you understand ashley's point as you didn't before.
That said...
Look at the lower end of the grid. They have enough money to tick over at the moment. That would dry up if the rules were freed up, as they'd be simply annihilated due to the existing budget differences. At the moment development is restricted. In your version of the sport, they'd be nowhere, losing sponsorship and thus the team goes bust. After a while there would only be a couple of teams in the sport.
So, you are proposing a spec F1. Historically, F1 gained its popularity from being the opposite.
Asphalt_World wrote:
Like I said earlier, what was wrong with last season, especially the first half of the season?
These:
1) Tyre rules: Having a single supplier opens the possibility of an agreement to do (indirect) manipulations. Having compulsory bad tyres for everyone opens the possibility to secretly give one team a good tyre.
2) DRS rules: Limiting the use of DRS to certain parts of the track opens the possibility that a team uses it outside of this zones without us or anyone else noticing it and that the FIA simply does not punish it.
3) KERS: Same as DRS. Exceeding the limits that the rules impose can't be judged by us nor rival teams. If the FIA want, they can allow selected teams to use some extra power.
4) Miscelaneous interventions: deployment of SC whenever their favourite driver is too far behind, etc.
5) As some other forumers have suggested: the FIA might have agreed with teams some results due to political situations or simply to share the benefits of being part of F1.
6) Controlling results (but making them look as if they were not) is very lucrative at betting. And I have the feelling that BE bets and earns a lot of money from that.
In general, rules are made to allow the fia to cheat. There is no transparency in them. Rules can certainly be transparent but people in the FIA do not want to make them more transparent simply because they think they can earn more like this. But this is false. They would earn more with a true competition.
ashley313 wrote:
What should be is what should be, and what can be is what can be, and never the twain shall meet.
F1 has to exist in the entire motorsport community, not just at the top of the open wheel ladder. Sports car car racing, endurance racing, rallying, stock car categories, touring car racing, motorbike racing, other major open wheel series, national series, regional series...all must fight for their piece of what is most definitely a finite pie of resources from talent to sponsorship, investment to broadcasting, and circuits to promoters. You can't rape the rest of the sport for the benefit of F1, there are too many other interests involved.
I think that is not the case. If F1 offered a better product, i.e., a more massive one, More money would be flowing into it borrowing (or raping) nothing to other series. See that a popular F1 eager to hire only the best of the best drivers and technical crew benefits other forms of motorsport in that they could become the main source of good F1 drivers. Sponsors would be looking desperately for good drivers everywhere, no matter if it is GP2, or the Australian national karting championship.
ashley313 wrote:
You have to reinvent the tiers below because they are the training ground for drivers, engineers, managers, designers, mechanics. If the series they are racing in has no relevance to F1, they will not be prepared for F1. They cannot have similar rules, as the feeder series do now, if F1 were as you imagine it. The teams can't exist that way.
Car racing is car racing in F1 and everywhere else. A good driver in karting could make it to F1 after some training in powerful cars. This is the beauty of motorsports. Driving is easy. Having the guts and ability to handle a fast car is something that requires talent. If you were born with it then you can make it to the top. The point is that drivers do not need to have years of experience in "similar" rules. Good drivers are everywhere in the world waiting to be discovered. If F1 has the motivation to do it, it will happen. These drivers will be discovered. Under the current rules, you must be good friend of Bernie or bribe him sufficiently so that you can win anything.
Volantary wrote:
I apologise to all those, including the OP, who have clearly put effort into their posts, but I don't have enough hours left on the earth to read through them!
I just want to say I love F1 as it is. DRS is a quick fix to a problem that should be solved by further restricting aero and other clever things I'm not smart enough to understand. But it works. We no longer have a repeat of Abu Dhabi 2010 with cars getting indefinitely stuck behind others without any hope of passing. We have situations like Spain 2011 where Hamilton followed Vettel throughout the last 20 laps of the race and at times looked pretty certain to overtake, only for Vettel to successfully defend. Which is much better. Pirelli tyres are great at simulating what we'd have if there was a tyre war. The drivers are generally very skilled and deserve to be in F1.
If you really want the sort of do-or-die racing on a budget, go and watch lower formulae or touring cars. I don't mean that in a fecaecious (sp, sorry always had a blind spot with that word) way, it is genuinely great racing and if you want to see it live tickets are dirt cheap. If you really don't like F1 as it is, F1 may not be for you.
I do not love F1 as it is now. It used to be something very different. See the criticism above about what is wrong in topday's F1 (if you have some time :) )