Re Vamping or Un Vamping Formula 1

[steveaki13]

I think we have had a thread like this before but I was bored :p

I have this uneasy feeling that Formula 1 is gradually dying or at least become ill.

For me its, DRS, Engine & Gearbox Conservation, and the general nanny state of F1.

Its also the amount of driving the radio engineer does. Telling a driver what to push, when to push it and what he can and cant do.

All these things lead me to enjoy F1 a lot less in recent years. Maybe the lack of a classic season has also played a part.

So my question to you regulars and any guests who want to sign up and post, is this:

HOW SHOULD F1 BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO GET F1 WHERE YOU WOULD LOVE IT AGAIN?

Give me an outline of what is wrong (if anything) with F1 now and what you would do to improve/change F1 for the better.

I still have to think about it myself, so I cant start us off.

[Bagwan]

First thing we have to do , Steve , is get it all back on free to air TV , so we don't have to listen to henners whining about it all the time .
That's been really spoiling it for me .

[steveaki13]

First thing we have to do , Steve , is get it all back on free to air TV , so we don't have to listen to henners whining about it all the time .
That's been really spoiling it for me .

:laugh:

It would be good though. As certainly in the UK it does seem to have had a negative effect on F1.

[steveaki13]

I cant go right into the technical side, because I simply do not know enough about it.

However I think over many years its constantly been "Wings" which have been mentioned as limiting following other cars closely.

So maybe its a case of reducing their effect or even removing them completely and relying more on mechanical grip. On the other hand I would like to ease restrictions on design, which would obviously counteract that.

So I am undecided on that point.

I would get rid of DRS and limits on engines/fuel/equipment in general. Also restrictions on Tyres.

I would also have a one hour session or two one hour sessions for Qualifying again, like Pre 2002. With the slight improvement that instead of 12 laps per hour, I would increase that and allow 2 runs per quarter of an hour or something. In order to get more running throughout the session.


I would allow cars to run 0stops or 3 stops and allow them to choose and maybe bring back refuelling.


No electronic aids like TC and alike.

I would also limit the penalty handing out. Without Engine restrictions etc... that would limit grid penalties. I would also give slightly more breathing space for blocking and real Racing incidents.

I am sure there are loop holes above, but it gives you a rough idea about what I would like to see changed in F1.

[Tazio]

The damnedest par about it IMO is we are being deprived (to a degree) of watching an enormously talented field show their real racing skill, seeing who can be on the limit most consistently. Seb, Bunsen, Fred, Kimi, The Boss, Felipe, yeah Fast Felipe, Britney, Hulk the list goes on. Poor freakin' Rogro went from a podium frequenter to an also ran over night. Maggie May, Bot, Leif, Hulk and are young guys and they may come out the other side when this insanity ends.
I'm afraid the same can't be said for the more senior pilots, and that is were it bro sucks dawgs,
Plus I'm getting old :angryfire
I'm losing my mind, must end this rant!! :crazy: :arrows:

[Mark]

:laugh:

It would be good though. As certainly in the UK it does seem to have had a negative effect on F1.

Very much so. It's meant F1 is dropping out of the public consciousness. A few years ago it was something the average guy in the office would have seen. Not so much now.

[janneppi]

Dropping out of the public consciousness might be a good thing. If the commercial side isn't as appealing, lack of advertising and cheaper sponsors would mean the teams wouldn't need 400 million per year budged to win. TV righs could then also be cheaper.

As for changes, I'd like to see less data stream from the car to the team during race. Let the driver sort out which gear they need to use in which corner.

[truefan72]

The damnedest par about it IMO is we are being deprived (to a degree) of watching an enormously talented field show their real racing skill, seeing who can be on the limit most consistently. Seb, Bunsen, Fred, Kimi, The Boss, Felipe, yeah Fast Felipe, Britney, Hulk the list goes on. Poor freakin' Rogro went from a podium frequenter to an also ran over night. Maggie May, Bot, Leif, Hulk and are young guys and they may come out the other side when this insanity ends.
I'm afraid the same can't be said for the more senior pilots, and that is were it bro sucks dawgs,
Plus I'm getting old :angryfire
I'm losing my mind, must end this rant!! :crazy: :arrows:

I agree Tazio, this is the crux of the problem
I understand all the technology and the need to move progress etc
but talent, or at least, pure racing talent, is being seriously compromised with a lot of these nonsensical things like joke tyres, fuel limitations etc
Your not getting old Tazio, and to be honest it wasn't even that long ago that F1 went this direction.
It was 2009 to be exact. Before that, I could live with the regs etc. and as I said many times over, by the end of 2008 i think all the cars were closer to each other than ever
STR and super Aguri were competitive with STR even winning a blood y race and Super aguri regularly troubling top teams. Then Nick the moron Fry, pulled the plug on that team mid season as the first salvo.
Then the radical new car designs for 2009 the blackmailed teams added to the grid in favor of good and legitimate applicants, the ridiculous push by mosley for homogenised series , and down the drain we went. I don;t mind DRS as it was a sensible solution to the tough and uncompromising situation. Kers, is ok too as it is a natural evolution of what drive trains could and should do.
but these races which are more about tyre management and fuel management , coupled with severe limitations is not what anybody wants to see.

I would love to see less regulation and more freedom for teams to develop their cars. Of course some standards and regs need to be in place, but not to this invasive level

[steveaki13]

As for changes, I's like to less data stream from the car to the team during race. Let the driver sort out which gear they need to use in which corner.

Well said

[steveaki13]

Would anyone agree that its been a process which began in 2003?

Remember 2002 had the same basic format that it had had for years.

Because of Ferrari domination, it seemed to lead to the first changes.

2003 saw 1 lap qualifying and running on race fuel in quali to artificially jumble grids. The first time "The show" was put above the sport maybe.

From then things were tweaked year on year and around 2009 all the major changes began to bring us to where we are today.

For me pre 2002 F1 was a more pure motorsport. Despite reg changes the same basic shape of F1 had remained for years.

I could live with 2003-2008 and enjoyed those seasons.

From 2009 onwards I have not found F1 as interesting and my love for the sport has fallen a bit. Albeit I was happy to see Jenson win in 2009.

Would you agree with me that the whole "Show" element around F1 has actually made it worse?

[journeyman racer]

Do any of you know what you really want?



I have this uneasy feeling that Formula 1 is gradually dying or at least become ill.
A bit of an exaggeration.



I am sure there are loop holes above, but it gives you a rough idea about what I would like to see changed in F1.
Yes, there were. Too numerous to outline all though.


The damnedest par about it IMO is we are being deprived (to a degree) of watching an enormously talented field show their real racing skill, What is "real racing skill"?


seeing who can be on the limit most consistently. Is it this? Because it isn't. If rules were designed so that you could supposedly see who's on the limit consistently. Then before long, you will get a high speed procession. Whatever weaknesses drivers have in this area will be identified, then resolved.

When that happens, there'll then be complaining about being boring. Then, there'll be a thread titled "What should be do to spice things up in F1?"

No.

[journeyman racer]

Would anyone agree that its been a process which began in 2003? Nope. It started for the 1994 season. In response to the destruction caused by the Williams FW14B/15C, and the increasing prominence of Indycar racing.


Dropping out of the public consciousness might be a good thing. If the commercial side isn't as appealing, lack of advertising and cheaper sponsors would mean the teams wouldn't need 400 million per year budged to win. TV righs could then also be cheaper.

As for changes, I'd like to see less data stream from the car to the team during race. Let the driver sort out which gear they need to use in which corner.I like your train of thought.

[Tazio]

Is it this?

I think it is. Plus I really don't care what others complain about. I have my own opinions, and I don't embrace the degree of fuel, and tire saving. Obviously you can't always be on the limit, and your point is well taken, strategy is important. I don't like the degree that the pilot's races are being micro-managed by their engineers.

[steveaki13]

I think it is. Plus I really don't care what others complain about. I have my own opinions, and I don't embrace the degree of fuel, and tire saving. Obviously you can't always be on the limit, and your point is well taken, strategy is important. I don't like the degree that the pilot's races are being micro-managed by their engineers.

Absolutely

[journeyman racer]

That being the case. The first thing to do would be to implement janneppi's idea, a see what occurs. But like his idea about the driver/seat/ballast idea on the other thread, it is too good of an idea to be implemented in F1. No way it'll be allowed to happen.

[Tazio]

Sadly true!

[truefan72]

I think it is. Plus I really don't care what others complain about. I have my own opinions, and I don't embrace the degree of fuel, and tire saving. Obviously you can't always be on the limit, and your point is well taken, strategy is important. I don't like the degree that the pilot's races are being micro-managed by their engineers.

exactly

[Ranger]

I have this uneasy feeling that Formula 1 is gradually dying or at least become ill.

I'm sure people were saying that when front-engined F1 cars became obsolete, and in countless times before and since.

[jens]

Regarding the technical side I have to say that... despite people not liking the lack of noise, F1 is going the right direction, which means green. It is actually a necessity, not just a random decision.

Due to global developments green technologies are the future to make life on this planet sustainable. As a result, if F1 still wants to have competitors, high-tech companies and engine manufacturers getting involved in racing, they must make the series relevant to them, i.e enable to develop technologies they can use in everyday businesses. Because nobody wants to throw tens of millions of $$ into the bin just for the fun of it - pragmatic world doesn't allow it. They want this exercise of F1 to be useful for them in general. Manufacturers don't want to develop outdated technologies that they don't use any more. V10 and V8 engines became such, however hybrid engines are (yet) not.

[henners88]

First thing we have to do , Steve , is get it all back on free to air TV , so we don't have to listen to henners whining about it all the time .
That's been really spoiling it for me .
I'm glad I am not the only one :)

[MacFeegle]

I think we have had a thread like this before but I was bored :p

I have this uneasy feeling that Formula 1 is gradually dying or at least become ill.

For me its, DRS, Engine & Gearbox Conservation, and the general nanny state of F1.

Its also the amount of driving the radio engineer does. Telling a driver what to push, when to push it and what he can and cant do.

All these things lead me to enjoy F1 a lot less in recent years. Maybe the lack of a classic season has also played a part.

So my question to you regulars and any guests who want to sign up and post, is this:

HOW SHOULD F1 BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO GET F1 WHERE YOU WOULD LOVE IT AGAIN?

Give me an outline of what is wrong (if anything) with F1 now and what you would do to improve/change F1 for the better.

I still have to think about it myself, so I cant start us off.

Ive a comfy armchair and and opinion so lets bitch a bit.


What do you want from racing? Not what it can give to you but what do you want?


I can think of every crash and bamm series under the sun but theyre not my bread and butter. I like speed and skill. I have that in F1 weather its V6, V8, V12, asperated etc. The tires dont worry me, the engines dont either. BUT, if the racing aint there, then the big boys, and the money, will bugger off somewhere else/

[anfield5]

Well Steve. I would like F1 to be the top rung of motorsport in terms of having the best drivers, not just the richest ones, and the best engineering.

To me the best era was in the 70's and 80's where the rules allowed designers to be a wee bit creative and come up with some quite amazing design solutions. Some of these worked i.e. ground effect (worked too well and cars became too fast in corners), some didn't i.e. gas turbine engines and to an extent 4 little steerable front wheels.

Teams with fairly small budgets such a Tyrrell could come up with something in the design of their car that would allow them to win against the mega-rich teams. Today the rules don't allow for this and it seems to be a case of 'have money - will win".

So a short answer to your question would be relax the design formula rules. Produce a set of safety guide-lines and allow designers the room to be creative and design, rather than building to a formula. Also relax the engine config rules. Sure make the formula for 1.6 litre, turbo units with energy recovery systems, but allow the engin designers to choose the number of pots in the engine, why do they HAVE to all be V6's. Some of the best seasons saw the Cosworth DFV V8 engines racing against the Ferrari V12's. It made the season more interesting because at some circuits the V8 was better and at the power circuits the V12's shone more.

[steveaki13]

Ive a comfy armchair and and opinion so lets bitch a bit.


What do you want from racing? Not what it can give to you but what do you want?



I want F1 pre 2003 ideally. The basic layout without the gimmicks of DRS and enforced tyre stops and saving engines and gearboxes. I have no issue with changing rules in terms of no driver aids and as such and aero cuts when needed. In fact it may be a point that aero in the shape of wings could be removed, but I believe F1 cars and drivers and the races themselves have all been forced to produce artificial action in the last 4 or 5 years. That does not say I cannot enjoy a good race (like Bahrain) but it doesn't sit comfortably with me.

Listen I know its not going to happen these days as the show and TV comes first before fairness, but I still believe F1 has problems. I am not clever enough to tell you all the ins and outs of technical regs, but I think DRS is fundamentally unfair for a start. That would go.

I have to say though F1 2014 has several things I like about it and I over reacted when opening the thread, because suddenly F1 seems better after a decent race.

However the problem I raised elsewhere that because of a more professional sport if you like that F1 has become, we actually have increasing levels of domination, because cars don't break down and cars are so efficient.

[steveaki13]

Well Steve. I would like F1 to be the top rung of motorsport in terms of having the best drivers, not just the richest ones, and the best engineering.

To me the best era was in the 70's and 80's where the rules allowed designers to be a wee bit creative and come up with some quite amazing design solutions. Some of these worked i.e. ground effect (worked too well and cars became too fast in corners), some didn't i.e. gas turbine engines and to an extent 4 little steerable front wheels.

Teams with fairly small budgets such a Tyrrell could come up with something in the design of their car that would allow them to win against the mega-rich teams. Today the rules don't allow for this and it seems to be a case of 'have money - will win".

So a short answer to your question would be relax the design formula rules. Produce a set of safety guide-lines and allow designers the room to be creative and design, rather than building to a formula. Also relax the engine config rules. Sure make the formula for 1.6 litre, turbo units with energy recovery systems, but allow the engin designers to choose the number of pots in the engine, why do they HAVE to all be V6's. Some of the best seasons saw the Cosworth DFV V8 engines racing against the Ferrari V12's. It made the season more interesting because at some circuits the V8 was better and at the power circuits the V12's shone more.

I largely agree, I feel all teams now are forced to much to go down similar routes.

[journeyman racer]

The more I think about it, the more I think there's unlikely to be any "vamping up" of F1. At least, not by deliberate action. It's quite clear that F1, due to the notion that it's the top level of motorsport, just attracts too many superficial, theatregoing people. When a non-completive element, like noise, fills so much sand into fans underpants, how can it vamped up, without it being contrived? That will then lead to more complaining about it being contrived, particularly from fans who complained about the noise.

F1 has been dumbed down a fair bit in the last 20 years, and particularly the last five. Enforcing the mandatory tyre stops, to use two compounds. This was done after refuelling was banned, so that it wasn't too different for theatregoing fans to take in. Then the request for a wider difference in compounds. Then asking for marshmallow tyres, to create a further unpredictable element.

Now that F1 has introduced a more natural set of regs, the previous contrived rules have actually affected teams form challenging Mercedes dominance. How so? With it being one tyre supplier, one compound is only necessary. A harder one, which is cheaper to produce and transport. With one compound, and not forcing the cars to stop at all, this opens up the tactics for other teams to put some pressure on Mercedes. Under these circumstances, Mercedes wouldn't stop at all. But then, other teams might, and run at a quicker pace. Maybe Mercedes might choose to stop, but then other teams won't, thinking they're a chance to hold them off. With variable conditions, tracks/surfaces, safety cars, and other variables. With the natural progression of improving cars throughout the season, this can then enhance the tactics/confusion further.

But no. Deep down, we like a dumbed down, predictable, pre-2014 F1.

[steveaki13]

The more I think about it, the more I think there's unlikely to be any "vamping up" of F1. At least, not by deliberate action. It's quite clear that F1, due to the notion that it's the top level of motorsport, just attracts too many superficial, theatregoing people. When a non-completive element, like noise, fills so much sand into fans underpants, how can it vamped up, without it being contrived? That will then lead to more complaining about it being contrived, particularly from fans who complained about the noise.

F1 has been dumbed down a fair bit in the last 20 years, and particularly the last five. Enforcing the mandatory tyre stops, to use two compounds. This was done after refuelling was banned, so that it wasn't too different for theatregoing fans to take in. Then the request for a wider difference in compounds. Then asking for marshmallow tyres, to create a further unpredictable element.

Now that F1 has introduced a more natural set of regs, the previous contrived rules have actually affected teams form challenging Mercedes dominance. How so? With it being one tyre supplier, one compound is only necessary. A harder one, which is cheaper to produce and transport. With one compound, and not forcing the cars to stop at all, this opens up the tactics for other teams to put some pressure on Mercedes. Under these circumstances, Mercedes wouldn't stop at all. But then, other teams might, and run at a quicker pace. Maybe Mercedes might choose to stop, but then other teams won't, thinking they're a chance to hold them off. With variable conditions, tracks/surfaces, safety cars, and other variables. With the natural progression of improving cars throughout the season, this can then enhance the tactics/confusion further.

But no. Deep down, we like a dumbed down, predictable, pre-2014 F1.

No we don't this season is better than the last 5, but we still have forced tyre stops, limited fuel and DRS. Get rid of these and get back to pure Qualifying (1 hour to do as fast as lap as possible without starting on theses tyres or that tyres or running with race fuel as we had years ago) and remove the gimmicks and I think F1 would be back to where I believe it should be.

GT racing and Le Man style racing I enjoy these days as there appears to be more racing and not as much sporting rules and regs. i.e get out there and race (to hell with saving fuel and running 2 types of tyre)

[journeyman racer]

Well, I agree with DRS going. Yes, it's a gimmick. Although, it's gimmick to negate all the other gimmicks that were brought it. I don't see the concern over limited fuel. Even if you allowed them as much fuel as the competitors wanted (or pre-2014 rules), they run them short of a full distance at flat out speed, to lessen the weight. Drivers would have to conserve to some degree. Current rules may take this type of driving even further, but all it is is a different type of driving. Also, if you don't force tyre stops, there'll often be times when the race appears processional, because they'll be able to pace themselves and people won't have a stop to look out for.

The 1 hour qualifying? I just remember people whinging about nothing happening for the first 40 minutes, despite a frantic last 20, 10 in particular. That forced the change to single lap qualifying, which then led to more whinging because that was seen as boring. I don't see any endurance racing. However, there's no way those guys aren't saving fuel. That'll be the difference between gaining and losing a position. Endurance racing donn't have to try to force sporting rules like F1, because the races are so long, it's pointless. But yeah, one of the reasons why F1 is meant to be hard (in theory), is that it was an endurance race length, but forced a sprint race intensity. A compressed endurance race is what F1 "should" be.

But no. The dumbing down, then further dumbing down, of F1, the past 20 years has meant a lower level of GP racing. People, including in the F1 industry, are so used to a homogenised F1, they get confused that the current rules (a natural development in the automotive industry) are somehow alternative, and that the last few years, are were "real" F1.

[henners88]

No we don't this season is better than the last 5, but we still have forced tyre stops, limited fuel and DRS. Get rid of these and get back to pure Qualifying (1 hour to do as fast as lap as possible without starting on theses tyres or that tyres or running with race fuel as we had years ago) and remove the gimmicks and I think F1 would be back to where I believe it should be.
I like the qualifying format of the past few years with 3 sessions. It forces teams onto track at regular intervals and we don't have half an hour of nothing any more. I'm glad refuelling has gone but would rather scrap the two tyre rule through a race. I don't feel it adds much and this season there appears to be less difference to last. DRS is about as false as it can get and at least KERS carries relevance. They seem to be obsessed with 'spicing up the show' with little regard to the racing of late. I did enjoy the last race though and hopefully we won't have too many races like Malaysia and more battles between Rosberg and Hamilton at the front if the others can't catch up. Its a strange era, this. :)