Future of F1

[newbie babs]

Excitement for me today when I saw the headlines

Formula 1's new racing boss Ross Brawn says he wants to develop a purer, simpler sport in which more teams and drivers can win.

I can`t wait to watch F1 once again. After over 30 years of watching and visiting venues I stopped watching most of the races last year as it got boring, predictable and so not interesting. Now Ross Brawn is back and he is an exceptional man with a fantastic analytical mind.

F1 might get back to being fascinating and competitive once again where you dont know who will win and the smaller teams might actually have a chance.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Is it this year or next year when it vanishes from freeview TV?

 

[Howardh]

I'm quite interested in F1, but these days I can't tell them apart. In the old days of Mansell, Prost, and before that it was always easy to identify the car and probably driver.

I Hunt's day, car, gearstick, breaks (if you were lucky) and get on with it. Too much computer tech nowadays, and too much nipping in and out of the pits. Like to see it introduced where if you have to pit, you have to stand for a minimum of 10 seconds, so it's not so attractive if you simply feel like a new set of tyres.

 

[47802]

So the mafia don of F1 has gone, not before time, yes he did a lot to make it what it is today, but I think he had lost the plot in recent years and should have gone much earlier.

I have read that the new owners are keen to keep the European historic races so hopefully Silverstone will be able to get a more reasonable deal that stops them pulling out. Also maybe we wont get so many races in random countries that were prepared to give enough money to Bernie.

Clearly we need some of the other teams to be able to get more on a par with Merc, and tyres where the drivers don't have to spend nearly all the time looking after them.

 

[90sWereBetter]

Given I expect Hamilton's going to win every race this year, I'm not holding out hope for now*. Everyone watch BTCC or IndyCar instead, it's much better

(*I used this logic last year, expecting Hamilton to win the title, and well, Rosberg won, so it must work. )

 

[AM9]

Given I expect Hamilton's going to win every race this year, I'm not holding out hope for now*. Everyone watch BTCC or IndyCar instead, it's much better

(*I used this logic last year, expecting Hamilton to win the title, and well, Rosberg won, so it must work. )

I agree that BTCC is a much better watch but IndyCar to me is mostly like watching Scalextric racing on a banked oval.

On Hamilton's success, he clearly is a driver of the order of Senna and Lauda as the experts say but I agree that the winners are more dependent on their teams's financila backing than the drivers' skills.
Like many other sports on TV, F1 (the sport) is just a vehicle (pun intended) for advertising and media profits.

 

[DarloRich]

good luck getting Ferrari to give up their vast financial premium just for turning up!

 

[D365]

Is it this year or next year when it vanishes from freeview TV?

2019 is when the new sky contract starts. Unfortunately Liberty Media has not shown any interest in renegotiation, in fact more of the opposite, they're going to continue to move F1 off FTA.

good luck getting Ferrari to give up their vast financial premium just for turning up!

Exactly my thought.

 

[GB]

I'm quite interested in F1, but these days I can't tell them apart. In the old days of Mansell, Prost, and before that it was always easy to identify the car and probably driver.

I Hunt's day, car, gearstick, breaks (if you were lucky) and get on with it. Too much computer tech nowadays, and too much nipping in and out of the pits. Like to see it introduced where if you have to pit, you have to stand for a minimum of 10 seconds, so it's not so attractive if you simply feel like a new set of tyres.

Nipping in and out? Depending on the track you will lose between 20-30 seconds and if it's not part of your strategy you will find yourself coming out in generally a much worse position.

Personally I would like to see an end to fuel saving and bring back refuelling.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

I think the number one thing killing F1 is the unwavering grid order. For the last three years it has been 100% predictable that a Merc will win unless they have a fault.

Fixing this doesn't need gimmicks, it needs careful rules amendments to keeps development limited. Brawn is the ideal person to do this.

Watch BTCC, NASCAR, FIA WEC or many other series and you can have a wide selection of potential winners in each race. Keeps things exciting.

 

[DarloRich]

Watch BTCC, NASCAR, FIA WEC or many other series and you can have a wide selection of potential winners in each race. Keeps things exciting.

With little technological advancement or initiative ( and success ballast in many cases)

 

[DaleCooper]

It's a pity we can never go back to how it was in the 60s. Between 1960 and 1970 the drivers championship was won by 8 different drivers in 6 different manufacturer's cars and for most of that time the cars were in national colours without any advertising. What's more the cars looked better.

 

[Howardh]

Nipping in and out? Depending on the track you will lose between 20-30 seconds and if it's not part of your strategy you will find yourself coming out in generally a much worse position.

Personally I would like to see an end to fuel saving and bring back refuelling.

As long as they get out, put the card in the slot, correct pin number etc... it's about time F1 was realistic

 

[Peter Mugridge]

2019 is when the new sky contract starts. Unfortunately Liberty Media has not shown any interest in renegotiation, in fact more of the opposite, they're going to continue to move F1 off FTA.

Given that Liberty are allied with... well... Google them! I am not at all surprised.

Looks like I'll just have to watch the things on YouTube long after they've actually run. There is no way I am going to pay Murdoch even a single penny so I can watch the races live...

 

[Tim R-T-C]

With little technological advancement or initiative ( and success ballast in many cases)

Ballast or engine limitations are required for non-spec series, like BTCC, WTCC and GT3 (Blancpain etc). where the cars are homogenated.

For F1, GTLM etc. the cars are built to a specification so ballast wouldn't be required.

Technical advancement is good, and of course highly present in FIA WEC - more so than F1 arguably, they had hybrids several years before F1 started using them - but not at the cost of the enjoyment and entertainment factor. In times like now, when money is tight and smaller teams are looking to be pushed out of the championship, stemming the need for massive investment might be good. Use spec parts, use existing technology to allow more teams to compete and make the focus on reliability and driver skills rather than wind tunnels.

 

[D365]

Given that Liberty are allied with... well... Google them! I am not at all surprised.

Looks like I'll just have to watch the things on YouTube long after they've actually run. There is no way I am going to pay Murdoch even a single penny so I can watch the races live...

They own virgin media, interestingly enough.

 

[DarloRich]

Ballast or engine limitations are required for non-spec series, like BTCC, WTCC and GT3 (Blancpain etc). where the cars are homogenated.

but it just artificially retards competition. Why should the best driver and car combo be forced to finish 7th to make the races more exciting? Those finishing in second should improve their machines.

For F1, GTLM etc. the cars are built to a specification so ballast wouldn't be required.

but wouldn't that make for more exiting racing? If it is acceptable in one, why not the other?

Technical advancement is good, and of course highly present in FIA WEC - more so than F1 arguably, they had hybrids several years before F1 started using them - but not at the cost of the enjoyment and entertainment factor. In times like now, when money is tight and smaller teams are looking to be pushed out of the championship, stemming the need for massive investment might be good. Use spec parts, use existing technology to allow more teams to compete and make the focus on reliability and driver skills rather than wind tunnels.

WEC is down to 2 manufacturers in LMP1 with only one confirmed for 2017. Great as it is as a series that has to be a worry - How long will Porsche and Toyota commit?

I would prefer that F1 shared out the prize money better rather than using any artificial limits on competition. I would prefer the bigger teams were obliged to "buddy up" with a small team to facilitate things like wind tunnel access, perhaps as part of an engine or driver deal. I would prefer if as part of their contract Mercedes and Ferrari (doubt anyone would take the Renault or Honda!) were obliged to offer, at decent rates, engines and engine performance support to the smaller teams.

 

[Clip]

Given that Liberty are allied with... well... Google them! I am not at all surprised.

Looks like I'll just have to watch the things on YouTube long after they've actually run. There is no way I am going to pay Murdoch even a single penny so I can watch the races live...

But they are allied with Virgin Media in this country given that they own them. Though they will probably charge Sky a fortune for the races or wrangle a reduced charge for Sky Sports on their platform - which would be a canny bit of business.

 

[Domh245]

Whatever the future holds, it'll be without Manor.

 

[D365]

Whatever the future holds, it'll be without Manor.

Technically, the company that owns the entries is still trading, however unlikely it may be that they return again to the grid.. The livery last year was absolutely fantastic though, probably the best on the grid. They were a fantastic little team that went through more highs and lows than many in their time.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The main problem with F1 is the prize fund. Even in the Premier League- not a company known for its socialist tendencies- all clubs get a sizeable payment for competing. The more you win the more money you get- as it should be, really- but you're not in the ridiculous situation where the winner takes it all and nobody else gets anything. The interest in F1 is about far more than the top three teams, it's something Ecclestone conveniently forgot because playing the teams off against each other for scraps from his table secured his power base.

The grid's down to 20 cars, the contractual minimum for most of the race agreements. If the new owners don't sort it out then Sauber are in a very precarious position, and they'll be in default of their agreements by not having enough competitors.

ETA: Manufacturer support of any series is cyclical, the second a series doesn't meet their marketing requirements they leave. We saw this with the BTCC in the late 90s, we saw it with World Rally in the early 2000s, we've seen it recently with the WTCC and WEC is heading the same way. Motor racing teams keep the series alive and interesting, and the issue is the funding in F1 makes it almost impossible for independent teams to survive. When even a team like Williams struggle, you know it's bad. The BTCC, thriving again now, almost went out of existence in the early 2000s after the manufacturers abandoned Super Touring, despite huge crowds, grids and TV coverage just a year or two before. If they're not careful F1 will go the same way.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

The main problem with F1 is the prize fund. Even in the Premier League- not a company known for its socialist tendencies- all clubs get a sizeable payment for competing. The more you win the more money you get- as it should be, really- but you're not in the ridiculous situation where the winner takes it all and nobody else gets anything. The interest in F1 is about far more than the top three teams, it's something Ecclestone conveniently forgot because playing the teams off against each other for scraps from his table secured his power base.

The grid's down to 20 cars, the contractual minimum for most of the race agreements. If the new owners don't sort it out then Sauber are in a very precarious position, and they'll be in default of their agreements by not having enough competitors.

Bernie often said he only wanted small grids, 18 to 20 cars was fine for him. Any extras he deemed worthless. Showing how little he cared for the live audience - the TV only shows top cars, but when you are at a race, having a big grid makes things a lot more interesting. Hopefully a new owner will see merit in having big grids and be more realistic with funding.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

ETA: Manufacturer support of any series is cyclical, the second a series doesn't meet their marketing requirements they leave. We saw this with the BTCC in the late 90s, we saw it with World Rally in the early 2000s, we've seen it recently with the WTCC and WEC is heading the same way. Motor racing teams keep the series alive and interesting, and the issue is the funding in F1 makes it almost impossible for independent teams to survive. When even a team like Williams struggle, you know it's bad. The BTCC, thriving again now, almost went out of existence in the early 2000s after the manufacturers abandoned Super Touring, despite huge crowds, grids and TV coverage just a year or two before. If they're not careful F1 will go the same way.

The clever move by Alan Gow of the BTCC was to make it possible for small private teams to compete at a high level. Allowing the use of spec parts etc.

This might be the way F1 needs to go. Allowing smaller teams to buy spec parts to save their costs. One way to do this is to force developers to sell their front wing assemblies (for example) for a set fee. Thus limiting their ability or desire to spend millions on developing them and allowing others to catch up. It is not ideal, a fully prototype series would be much better, but for a few years it would keep F1 exciting and allow money and viewers to return.

 

[JamesRowden]

I think that a problem is that some viewers decide (perhaps subconsciously) to only be interested in who comes first. At the end of 2013 when Vettel was winning all of the races, I heard people indicating that it was boring because they knew who was going to win, even though there was a well televised race going on behind Vettel.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Bernie often said he only wanted small grids, 18 to 20 cars was fine for him. Any extras he deemed worthless. Showing how little he cared for the live audience - the TV only shows top cars, but when you are at a race, having a big grid makes things a lot more interesting. Hopefully a new owner will see merit in having big grids and be more realistic with funding.

There's something to be said for quality over quantity- I'd rather not see the likes of Forti, Life or Andrea Moda anywhere near a grid again- but it's important to have some depth throughout the field. A team like Sauber should be able to survive.

To an extent it's always been like this- Tyrrell, Ligier, even world championship winning Brabham, went bust. But the income disparity is beyond a joke, and it isn't even down to success given the payments being made to perennial losers Ferrari and McLaren.