Worry for the future

[Sleeper]

I saw this on ITV's website and I emidiatly picked out the part of freeing up driver aids. Is anyone else worried that for the FIA to seccure Manufacturer involvment in F1 for the future it has sold its soul by letting them run amok with electronic gizmos that dont actually have any effect on reducing pollution/increasing efficiancy, which was the main reason that the FIA still want them (it makes a good defence against when the governments inevitably turn on the sport with their increasingly "green" outlook).

I'm not saying this is a given but I will be anxiously awayting to see what they say in the coming years. :(

[Labonte Massa]

If F1 is truly the pinnacle of motorsport with the best drivers, we shouldn't need stupid driving aids.

[Donney]

:up:

[SuperAguri]

I totally agree. In the 80s and early 90s we really knew who was the best and who wasn't.

[agwiii]

I saw this on ITV's website and I emidiatly picked out the part of freeing up driver aids. Is anyone else worried that for the FIA to seccure Manufacturer involvment in F1 for the future it has sold its soul by letting them run amok with electronic gizmos that dont actually have any effect on reducing pollution/increasing efficiancy, which was the main reason that the FIA still want them (it makes a good defence against when the governments inevitably turn on the sport with their increasingly "green" outlook).

I'm not saying this is a given but I will be anxiously awayting to see what they say in the coming years. :(

I believe the FIA sold out long ago.

[ArrowsFA1]

F1 has to decide what it wants to be. Increasingly it has become a manufacturers shop window with drivers cast as mannequins.

For the sport to redeem itself in my eyes, it needs to allow the drivers to express their skills, not hide them beneath layers of technology. I'm sure the likes of Peter Windsor would argue that drivers do express their skills, but he is one of few fortunate enough to sit alongside them at media events and witness their lightning reactions. Those of us who sit in the stands, or watch on tv, are not so fortunate.

[philipbain]

The manufacturers are insisting on driver aids, and Max's pledge of no traction control in F1 has gone quiet of late, though I think that the standard ECU is still coming in so we'll have to wait and see if that still means the end of traction control. As for the future rules, I like the idea of bio fuelled cars with turbocharging, and with a freedom on driver aids we can all party like its 1987 when active suspension and turbos were all the rage in F1!

[DexDexter]

I totally agree. In the 80s and early 90s we really knew who was the best and who wasn't.

Really? I recall that in 92 Williams had all the gismos and dominated the season because of that, a puppet could have won with that car.

[ShiftingGears]

If this keeps happening then I will probably stop watching. Then again I'm sure Bernie and Max don't care if they start losing the fans of F1, as there is always an endless supply of new countries to exploit that don't know what motor racing is. Sadly, money talks :(

[jens]

Car has always had more significance in making a good result than a driver. How many drivers there are that haven't won the title in the best car? (1962, 1964, 1982, 1986, 1995 spring to my mind, but at least first four titles of them were clearly a lucky ones). Formula One has never been meant to clarify, which is the best driver. The goal has always been to clarify the best car. The drivers have been just "tools" hired by teams to realise the potential of the machinery.

Already in the 1930s legendary Daimler-Benz drivers at one point criticized that the car was not good enough for winning. The team principle Alfred Neubauer answered: "Actually the result depends on a driver - maybe he lacks a bit of courage or a bit of skill in corners?"

Now many of you are still largely talking about drivers and their "Championship material". Fisichella has been written off from the 2007 WDC challenge, but if the car counts - as you say - then why should he be written off? You are talking that car means everything, but on the other hand you tend to write off most of the drivers. Isn't that a paradox?

Finally I'd say that yes, in the past the gaps of abilities between different drivers were bigger, but the cars were also more unequal (still in 92-93 it was usual that the last point scorer loses by 2-3 laps to the winner and 10th in the qualifying is 3-5 secs behind the 1st). At the moment I'm pretty convinced that all the current drivers are within one second (or even less) a lap in their abilities.

If all the driver aids will be prohibited, then the gap between drivers per lap might be a bit bigger, but we shouldn't expect any miracles. A top driver still needs a top car for winning, not a Spyker unless all the cars will be within 1 second a lap in competitiveness. And finally - in today's level of professionalism even without driver aids most of the guys will be very closely levelled. And another aspect - even without driver aids today's car is still easier to drive than the past car without driver aids - the aerodynamics are a lot better and the cars are better drivable. So we shouldn't make too many comparisons between now and 'good old' past.

Hopefully that post isn't too garbled. :)

[rebelgroove]

@ jens ... i agree ... today the car is more important than the driver ... to the sport's detraction ... if i were max, i'd restrict aerodynamic grip with mechanical grip (ie, tires) ... then we'd see which drivers had the courage not to 'lift' through corners like eau rouge ...

@ squirrel ... i agree here too ... it's not about the 'sport' anymore, just the glamour and the money ... i am watching less and less of f1 (especially since jacques left) ... i actually can see A1 taking a lot of f1's fan base if things contiunue as they are ...

@ dex ... it was mansell who said a monkey could hahve won in that 92 williams ...

[DexDexter]

I don't believe that the cars are more important now than they were before, here are a couple of examples: in 1978 Colin Champan revolutionised F1 with the ground effect car, Andretti ja Peterson totally dominated the races because they had a superior car. In 1988, Mclaren had a huge advantage over anyone else with the honda-engine+ chassis, and easily won 15 of 16 races... How is the car more important now than in those times??? As somebody wrote F1 is not about the best drivers, it's about the best constructors and drivers, and it's been like that for at least the last 30+ years.

[jso1985]

I'm with DexDexter. :up:

The cars might be easier to handle now but they have always been as important as they they are now