Formula One
 

We discussed possible changes....and here they come!

http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/news/story?id=1795105

Don

Good read. I'm a huge Formula One fan and feel the changes will be for the better of the sport... However, it will be a sad day if all of the high-tech electronic gizmos are removed - Formula One has always been a showcase of the latest technology that often makes its way to street cars (e.g. Sequential Manual Gearboxes).

Ferrari's racing budget is astronomically high - it's more than the GDP of some third world countries!!! :eek:

-Chike

I'm skeptical.

1. I don't think budget caps are enforceable. They need to be self-imposed by the teams. Maybe that's what this is, I don't know. But it seems to me that any team needs to decide what they can and can't spend. If they can't afford to keep up with one particular team, then maybe they need to work together - like Sauber is with Ferrari.

2. More races and less testing sounds good. It makes sense.

3. I really hope they're not serious about an FIA ECU. I think that was just a scare tactic to get the teams seriously talking. Seems like it worked.

There's so much talk about making F1 affordable, and I don't understand that. It's not supposed to be affordable - its supposed to be the top. I think trying to make it cheaper misses the point. What the FIA should be doing is encouraging innovation, not squelching it. They should be cultivating an environment and creating a formula that has some pertinence to road cars. How one would go about doing that, I don't know - few series have this going for them any more.

F-1
 

Bernie goes NASCAR...why don't they do what IMSA and the Euro Sedan and GT organizers do? When you win, weight is added to your car until you lose, then weight is reduced....same as handicapping in horse racing.

Re: F-1
 

I don't like the idea of 'handicapping' in F1. I don't think many people would. What Montoya or Button or Raikkonen fan wants to see their favorite driver beat Michael Schumacher because the Ferrari was carrying 60kg of ballast?

I've never liked the idea of punishing teams and drivers for winning races.

Re: Re: F-1
 

That's one way of looking at it...but aren't the new rules just a more expensive way of doing the same thing? (Ask Ferrari).

Also, what would those Montoya, Button and Raikkonen fans say if the 60kg were added to Schumacher's car and he still won?

In the meantime, Bernie's got to do something...passing only in the pits is a far cry from what F1 racing should be all about.

I just had an interesting idea. There's been a lot of talk about proposed rules changes. New engine formats. Spec electronics. Ick.

One of the proposals is to require engines to last not just one race weekend but maybe 3 or as many as 6 weekends. That's interesting, but I don't see what it'll solve.

Maybe I look at things with a game design perspective, I don't know. But if you want to balance things, here's my idea.

Instead of requiring that engines last a certain number of weekends, why not just limit the total number of engines a team can use in a given season? Allow the teams to decide how and when to use those engines. So if Ferrari still want to do massinve testing, then the engines they have left have to last multiple races. Minardi, not being able to afford testing, can toss in a fresh lump for every qualifying and race session.