planetf1.com

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: I'm not actually saying get rid. I'm saying F1 has nothing to fear by them walking away. The product is so bad right now it is time to take risks.

Ferrari have massive fan support maybe 50% of F1, the product is so bad because Mercedes are winning if Ferrari were winning I would guess that maybe 90% of these posts wouldn't have been made?

Are you joking? Again, I refer you to the 2003 rule changes specifically designed to end Ferrari dominance.

That was after just 3 Championships of it.

Edited to say I bet competetive racing has more fans than Ferrari.

I could have said if Red Bull were winning, anybody that wasn't Mercedes.

My reference to Ferrari was you saying F1 has nothing to fear about Ferrari walking away with their 50% F1 fan base.

Surely you remember people moaning when Red Bull were winning every race? Pirelli designed tyres in 2013 specifically to stop them. Nobody is blindly prejudiced against Mercedes here.

If 50% of people who watch an F1 race solely because of Ferrari then F1 has far worse problems than even I thought. Luckily there's no way that's the case.

I think the poor racing and lack of competition drives away more fans than Ferrari quitting would.

Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: Renault threatened to pull out and that contributed heavily to F1 adopting the hybrid engines and afterwards Mercedes also admitted they were considering the same. And any proposed changes these days tend to be shot down by the big teams so the pecking order remains the same. There is a disparity in finances which absolutely does contribute to the pecking order but the biggest disparity is in whether or not you have an engine manufacturer's backing and without that your chances of winning are almost non-existent

The manufacturers threatened to pull out because they didn't want to continue building what were basically spec engines, like I said the Hybrids were pushed forward by Todt that's what he wanted.

If the chances of a customer winning are almost non-existent then why did both Mercedes and Ferrari refuse to supply Red Bull with engines?

I've no doubt the way Red Bull treated their engine partner, who had supplied them with the means to win four driver and four manufacturer titles, had more than a little to do with it.

Both RD and Marko have publicly stated that in order to win you cannot be just a customer. But waht do they know, eh?

Todt may well have raised the idea for the hybrids, but I don't recall him saying he would shut down the series if it didn't happen. It was Renault initially who refused to compromise and then Merc and the others followed suit. And now it's the manufacturers who tend to block any attempt to change the status quo and zealously guard their position in the sport.

Verstappen would disagree

https://f1i.com/news/291852-verstappen- ... gines.html

So what?

So what if Marko said different then?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: I think there's a strong argument to say F1 has already deviated quite strongly from its core principles and many are advocating a return back from that

What principles would that be?

well you're the one who brought them up - why don't you tell me?

You specifically said F1 has deviated away from it's core principles how can I know what you're referring to?

In response to you saying they shouldn't move away from their core principles

Yeah things like reverse grids and no longer having qualifying, just one thing I've read in this thread, what core principles do you think that F1 has moved away from?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: Brundle's article didn't mention budget caps and mentioned compromises, plural, so likely to be much more than just that. He talked about root and branch changes needed and I think that would be odd terminology to use if all you were talking about was budgets

The main issues are distribution of funds and budget caps and has nothing to do with the engines, who in the paddock do you see bringing up engines as being any kind of problem?

Those are the main issues in your opinion. I disagree and there are plenty of people who a simple Google search will return who have gone on record saying the current technology is far too complicated for its own good and who advocate a return to simpler, more cost-effective racing

Who has said this recently?

You found a quote from Verstappen from over a year ago, so I', pretty sure you know how to use Google

I'm not sure that's how it works, I have to find a source to back up what you said?

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:The main issues are distribution of funds and budget caps and has nothing to do with the engines, who in the paddock do you see bringing up engines as being any kind of problem?

Those are the main issues in your opinion. I disagree and there are plenty of people who a simple Google search will return who have gone on record saying the current technology is far too complicated for its own good and who advocate a return to simpler, more cost-effective racing

Who has said this recently?

You found a quote from Verstappen from over a year ago, so I', pretty sure you know how to use Google

I'm not sure that's how it works, I have to find a source to back up what you said?

It's common knowledge I thought. Are you trying to tell me you are unaware that Horner has been vocal against the hybrids, which strangely stopped when he got himself a works deal? Or Vettel saying the hybrids are too complex? Or even Jean Todt who says F1 is too complicated. Or Prost, Lauda, Johansson and Brundle all saying the hybrids have been a mistake? Or LdM who says he made a mistake accepting the introduction of hybrids? Or that attempts were made to abandon the costly hybrid concept but that was shot down by the manufacturers? Are you unaware of any of that?

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:What principles would that be?

well you're the one who brought them up - why don't you tell me?

You specifically said F1 has deviated away from it's core principles how can I know what you're referring to?

In response to you saying they shouldn't move away from their core principles

Yeah things like reverse grids and no longer having qualifying, just one thing I've read in this thread, what core principles do you think that F1 has moved away from?

Restricting innovation, for one. And that's a big one. Never have the rules been tied down as much as they have since the introduction of the hybrids. Changing the entire philosophy by forcing a component on the teams that is not fit for purpose - the tyres, in case you are wondering - and making a major part that for the first time in history has not been designed with maximum performance in mind but with the idea to throw a joker in the pack is another. Both of those are the antithesis of what F1 has always been. Moving it away from being a sport to making it a stated aim to be road relevant, which I wonder anyone can say with a straight face when you see how much money they plow into the front wings alone, which have zero relevance beyond F1. Making it so that teams are forced to choose engine supply from a very small number of suppliers - who are also competitors - with little to no hope that they will ever be able to source independently is a fourth. All of these are fairly major and have had a significant impact.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:The manufacturers threatened to pull out because they didn't want to continue building what were basically spec engines, like I said the Hybrids were pushed forward by Todt that's what he wanted.

If the chances of a customer winning are almost non-existent then why did both Mercedes and Ferrari refuse to supply Red Bull with engines?

I've no doubt the way Red Bull treated their engine partner, who had supplied them with the means to win four driver and four manufacturer titles, had more than a little to do with it.

Both RD and Marko have publicly stated that in order to win you cannot be just a customer. But waht do they know, eh?

Todt may well have raised the idea for the hybrids, but I don't recall him saying he would shut down the series if it didn't happen. It was Renault initially who refused to compromise and then Merc and the others followed suit. And now it's the manufacturers who tend to block any attempt to change the status quo and zealously guard their position in the sport.

Verstappen would disagree

https://f1i.com/news/291852-verstappen- ... gines.html

So what?

So what if Marko said different then?

You don't understand context, I guess. You don't get that Verstappen was highlighting how the Red Bull chassis was being held back by its PU and the Merc one - the best at the time - would have seen them win races - all other things being equal - because the Red Bull chassis was the best (in his opinion)? You see that as carrying more weight than a TP and other very senior team figures stating that being a customer carries disadvantages over a works team and you don't understand the difference between talking up a chassis and a serious concern on the state of F1? er, OK

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: Those are the main issues in your opinion. I disagree and there are plenty of people who a simple Google search will return who have gone on record saying the current technology is far too complicated for its own good and who advocate a return to simpler, more cost-effective racing

Who has said this recently?

You found a quote from Verstappen from over a year ago, so I', pretty sure you know how to use Google

I'm not sure that's how it works, I have to find a source to back up what you said?

It's common knowledge I thought. Are you trying to tell me you are unaware that Horner has been vocal against the hybrids, which strangely stopped when he got himself a works deal? Or Vettel saying the hybrids are too complex? Or even Jean Todt who says F1 is too complicated. Or Prost, Lauda, Johansson and Brundle all saying the hybrids have been a mistake? Or LdM who says he made a mistake accepting the introduction of hybrids? Or that attempts were made to abandon the costly hybrid concept but that was shot down by the manufacturers? Are you unaware of any of that?

Red Bull started the hybrid era with a works engine deal, their only problem was with not having a competitive engine.

I would be guessing that many of the comments came from the early years of Mercedes domination and the woes of Honda in particular, now here we are today and you still think the hybrids are the main thing stopping competition on the track?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: You specifically said F1 has deviated away from it's core principles how can I know what you're referring to?

In response to you saying they shouldn't move away from their core principles

Yeah things like reverse grids and no longer having qualifying, just one thing I've read in this thread, what core principles do you think that F1 has moved away from?

Restricting innovation, for one. And that's a big one. Never have the rules been tied down as much as they have since the introduction of the hybrids. Changing the entire philosophy by forcing a component on the teams that is not fit for purpose - the tyres, in case you are wondering - and making a major part that for the first time in history has not been designed with maximum performance in mind but with the idea to throw a joker in the pack is another. Both of those are the antithesis of what F1 has always been. Moving it away from being a sport to making it a stated aim to be road relevant, which I wonder anyone can say with a straight face when you see how much money they plow into the front wings alone, which have zero relevance beyond F1. Making it so that teams are forced to choose engine supply from a very small number of suppliers - who are also competitors - with little to no hope that they will ever be able to source independently is a fourth. All of these are fairly major and have had a significant impact.

So in this thread I have to read posts that want to see closer more competitive racing between all the teams and you and some others that want to see unrestricted rules than encourage innovation that inevitable will not produce close racing, it invariable didn't in the past.

The tyres have been around since 2011 and were worse when they first came out, the tyres are a joke because they're not built for maximum performance so all in all F1 is too restrictive yet the V8 engines seemingly get a free pass, the equalised frozen in development engines that we had from 2006-2013.

There are 10 teams in F1 with 4 engine suppliers yet it's a restricted supply, in Indycar there are only 2 engine manufacturers supplying more teams, but your problem is engine suppliers having their own teams so were does that put Ferrari?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: Verstappen would disagree

https://f1i.com/news/291852-verstappen- ... gines.html

So what?

So what if Marko said different then?

You don't understand context, I guess. You don't get that Verstappen was highlighting how the Red Bull chassis was being held back by its PU and the Merc one - the best at the time - would have seen them win races - all other things being equal - because the Red Bull chassis was the best (in his opinion)? You see that as carrying more weight than a TP and other very senior team figures stating that being a customer carries disadvantages over a works team and you don't understand the difference between talking up a chassis and a serious concern on the state of F1? er, OK

I see Verstappen saying he could win races and titles with the Mercedes engine and you quoting Marko someone who is often derided for his opinions.

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

I stopped reading after the first paragraph, Ferrari clearly caught up and some would say they should have won the titles last year and had a shot the year before that.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

If it happens it happens. I'm sure some would but I doubt it would be a very high percentage. I don't think you can let the fear of it shape the regulations of the sport.

F1 would still have a lot of problems if it was Ferrari or Red Bull dominating. The neither of them can is one of the problems F1 has but it's far from the only issue.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

If it happens it happens. I'm sure some would but I doubt it would be a very high percentage. I don't think you can let the fear of it shape the regulations of the sport.

F1 would still have a lot of problems if it was Ferrari or Red Bull dominating. The neither of them can is one of the problems F1 has but it's far from the only issue.

Well let's see what 2021 brings, properly thought out regulations have got to be better than the knee jerk regulation changes year after year that some people seem to want until they get the desired result, these changes always come at great financial cost which only seems to be a problem when it suits perhaps?

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:Who has said this recently?

You found a quote from Verstappen from over a year ago, so I', pretty sure you know how to use Google

I'm not sure that's how it works, I have to find a source to back up what you said?

It's common knowledge I thought. Are you trying to tell me you are unaware that Horner has been vocal against the hybrids, which strangely stopped when he got himself a works deal? Or Vettel saying the hybrids are too complex? Or even Jean Todt who says F1 is too complicated. Or Prost, Lauda, Johansson and Brundle all saying the hybrids have been a mistake? Or LdM who says he made a mistake accepting the introduction of hybrids? Or that attempts were made to abandon the costly hybrid concept but that was shot down by the manufacturers? Are you unaware of any of that?

Red Bull started the hybrid era with a works engine deal, their only problem was with not having a competitive engine.

I would be guessing that many of the comments came from the early years of Mercedes domination and the woes of Honda in particular, now here we are today and you still think the hybrids are the main thing stopping competition on the track?

Tyres would be my all-time number one in what is wrong with F1 today but the hybrids and what they represent would be a good second. Fundamentally they have been a disaster for F1 and the sport is definitely not better for their presence.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

If it happens it happens. I'm sure some would but I doubt it would be a very high percentage. I don't think you can let the fear of it shape the regulations of the sport.

F1 would still have a lot of problems if it was Ferrari or Red Bull dominating. The neither of them can is one of the problems F1 has but it's far from the only issue.

Well let's see what 2021 brings, properly thought out regulations have got to be better than the knee jerk regulation changes year after year that some people seem to want until they get the desired result, these changes always come at great financial cost which only seems to be a problem when it suits perhaps?

I would be a lot more hopeful about the 2021 if the teams weren't involved in writing them. Even so 7 seasons with these turgid, moribund set of regulations has been a disaster for Formula 1.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: You specifically said F1 has deviated away from it's core principles how can I know what you're referring to?

In response to you saying they shouldn't move away from their core principles

Yeah things like reverse grids and no longer having qualifying, just one thing I've read in this thread, what core principles do you think that F1 has moved away from?

Restricting innovation, for one. And that's a big one. Never have the rules been tied down as much as they have since the introduction of the hybrids. Changing the entire philosophy by forcing a component on the teams that is not fit for purpose - the tyres, in case you are wondering - and making a major part that for the first time in history has not been designed with maximum performance in mind but with the idea to throw a joker in the pack is another. Both of those are the antithesis of what F1 has always been. Moving it away from being a sport to making it a stated aim to be road relevant, which I wonder anyone can say with a straight face when you see how much money they plow into the front wings alone, which have zero relevance beyond F1. Making it so that teams are forced to choose engine supply from a very small number of suppliers - who are also competitors - with little to no hope that they will ever be able to source independently is a fourth. All of these are fairly major and have had a significant impact.

So in this thread I have to read posts that want to see closer more competitive racing between all the teams and you and some others that want to see unrestricted rules than encourage innovation that inevitable will not produce close racing, it invariable didn't in the past.

The tyres have been around since 2011 and were worse when they first came out, the tyres are a joke because they're not built for maximum performance so all in all F1 is too restrictive yet the V8 engines seemingly get a free pass, the equalised frozen in development engines that we had from 2006-2013.

There are 10 teams in F1 with 4 engine suppliers yet it's a restricted supply, in Indycar there are only 2 engine manufacturers supplying more teams, but your problem is engine suppliers having their own teams so were does that put Ferrari?

Sorry, this post is all over the place and it's unclear what you're trying to say here.

You appear to be confusing various positions. I've not made an argument for closer racing so you need to take that up with those that have. I'm arguing for greater opportunity for teams to achieve success, which I think is also what mikeyg123 is saying (apologies if I'm wrong), and that's not quite the same thing. I believe the current rules greatly favour the manufacturers to the extent that non-manufacturers have next to no chance of success and I think that's damaging to F1.

I have no idea what you are doing trying to conflate the tyres with the V8 engines. I don't recall even mentioning V8s so you're going to have to help me with that point, assuming there even is one.

My problem is that it's a closed shop and the teams have a choice of competing against the manufacturers who have their own teams with a built in advantage and therefore accepting that they will never be more than also-rans or leaving F1 altogether. They cannot win in the current situation. I have no problem with having manufacturers involved in F1 but there is an imbalance now that is unhealthy. In the past teams at least had the possibility of trying to source alternative suppliers but a number have gone on record to say that they will not consider entering with the existing engine regs and that is bad for F1 IMO.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: Verstappen would disagree

https://f1i.com/news/291852-verstappen- ... gines.html

So what?

So what if Marko said different then?

You don't understand context, I guess. You don't get that Verstappen was highlighting how the Red Bull chassis was being held back by its PU and the Merc one - the best at the time - would have seen them win races - all other things being equal - because the Red Bull chassis was the best (in his opinion)? You see that as carrying more weight than a TP and other very senior team figures stating that being a customer carries disadvantages over a works team and you don't understand the difference between talking up a chassis and a serious concern on the state of F1? er, OK

I see Verstappen saying he could win races and titles with the Mercedes engine and you quoting Marko someone who is often derided for his opinions.

Like I said, you don't understand context, even after it's explained to you, apparently...

pokerman wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

I stopped reading after the first paragraph, Ferrari clearly caught up and some would say they should have won the titles last year and had a shot the year before that.

Then maybe you should've at least read the second paragraph before commenting.

The basic hierarchy remains as it has done for almost all of the hybrid era. Merc in front, Ferrari 2nd, RB 3rd, then daylight to the rest. Tight regulations have only led to a stagnation of the pecking order. At least with open regulations there's the opportunity for a team to develop an innovation that may help pull then up the grid like the double diffuser or the F duct for example.

Every team competing in the championship should, at the bare minimum, be entitled to the opportunity to battle with their opponents on a level playing field. I don't think anyone here is saying all the cars should be competing equally, but they sure as hell should have the right under the regulations to be able to.

My idea for F1 is to be what F1 historically has been - the pursuit of ultimate performance. All the attempts to slow the cars down has meant that technology has outgrown F1 and the sport no longer has that "wow" factor it had when it was at the cutting edge.

Formula 1 competition should be made into this:



I've been arguing this for nearly ten years now. All the "reasons it can't be done" are nothing more than obstacles to resolve - and what could be more F1 than that?

myattitude wrote:My idea for F1 is to be what F1 historically has been - the pursuit of ultimate performance. All the attempts to slow the cars down has meant that technology has outgrown F1 and the sport no longer has that "wow" factor it had when it was at the cutting edge.

Formula 1 competition should be made into this:



I've been arguing this for nearly ten years now. All the "reasons it can't be done" are nothing more than obstacles to resolve - and what could be more F1 than that?

F1 was always open top and (nearly) always open wheeled. I am not sure this is the answer, although it would be awesome as a Le Mans concept!

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

I stopped reading after the first paragraph, Ferrari clearly caught up and some would say they should have won the titles last year and had a shot the year before that.

Then maybe you should've at least read the second paragraph before commenting.

The basic hierarchy remains as it has done for almost all of the hybrid era. Merc in front, Ferrari 2nd, RB 3rd, then daylight to the rest. Tight regulations have only led to a stagnation of the pecking order. At least with open regulations there's the opportunity for a team to develop an innovation that may help pull then up the grid like the double diffuser or the F duct for example.

Every team competing in the championship should, at the bare minimum, be entitled to the opportunity to battle with their opponents on a level playing field. I don't think anyone here is saying all the cars should be competing equally, but they sure as hell should have the right under the regulations to be able to.

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

That's not accurate at all though is it? It has not been 5 years with the same rules at all. There was a radical change to the aero regs in 2017 and a more modest change for this year. The fact is that this type of change generally signals a change in the pecking order and if you pay attention; that has been the case here too. In 2014; Ferrari were nowhere. Williams and Red Bull were the next strongest teams after Mercedes. In 2015, Ferrari surged to the fore; becoming the second strongest team but by 2016, arguably, Red Bull surpassed them or at least matched them. In 2017-2018 we had Ferrari reach par with Mercedes after the aero change and this year they have regressed again.

The bottom line is that, despite frequent changes to the rules, Mercedes are the team that have consistently done the best job of adapting and designing a strong car. To suggest that they have kept the rules stagnant is simply inaccurate. We have never had such a volatile period of regulations changes in the history of F1. The other teams have simply not performed as well as Mercedes.

You don't actually have to go back very far to find a similar period of dominance. Ferrari from 1999-2004 was much the same. It was the tire reg change in 2005 that finally got their number.

sandman1347 wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

That's not accurate at all though is it? It has not been 5 years with the same rules at all. There was a radical change to the aero regs in 2017 and a more modest change for this year. The fact is that this type of change generally signals a change in the pecking order and if you pay attention; that has been the case here too. In 2014; Ferrari were nowhere. Williams and Red Bull were the next strongest teams after Mercedes. In 2015, Ferrari surged to the fore; becoming the second strongest team but by 2016, arguably, Red Bull surpassed them or at least matched them. In 2017-2018 we had Ferrari reach par with Mercedes after the aero change and this year they have regressed again.

The bottom line is that, despite frequent changes to the rules, Mercedes are the team that have consistently done the best job of adapting and designing a strong car. To suggest that they have kept the rules stagnant is simply inaccurate. We have never had such a volatile period of regulations changes in the history of F1. The other teams have simply not performed as well as Mercedes.

You don't actually have to go back very far to find a similar period of dominance. Ferrari from 1999-2004 was much the same. It was the tire reg change in 2005 that finally got their number.

That's not really accurate either.

Ferrari were down in 2014 only because of their too-small turbo and the idiotic rules of the time meant that they couldn't change it and had to wait a year. They didn't surge to the fore the following year. 2016 the only real change was Williams falling into obscurity but that's mismanagement rather than reg change.

2017 wasn't as big a change as people were making out and the pecking order remained virtually static. Throughout the hybrid era the order has remained reasonably constant with just a few minor variances

sandman1347 wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

That's not accurate at all though is it? It has not been 5 years with the same rules at all. There was a radical change to the aero regs in 2017 and a more modest change for this year. The fact is that this type of change generally signals a change in the pecking order and if you pay attention; that has been the case here too. In 2014; Ferrari were nowhere. Williams and Red Bull were the next strongest teams after Mercedes. In 2015, Ferrari surged to the fore; becoming the second strongest team but by 2016, arguably, Red Bull surpassed them or at least matched them. In 2017-2018 we had Ferrari reach par with Mercedes after the aero change and this year they have regressed again.

The bottom line is that, despite frequent changes to the rules, Mercedes are the team that have consistently done the best job of adapting and designing a strong car. To suggest that they have kept the rules stagnant is simply inaccurate. We have never had such a volatile period of regulations changes in the history of F1. The other teams have simply not performed as well as Mercedes.

You don't actually have to go back very far to find a similar period of dominance. Ferrari from 1999-2004 was much the same. It was the tire reg change in 2005 that finally got their number.

It's 6 seasons with the most stability among the relative performance that I remember. Basically it's the same 3 teams at the front with Williams the only team to come or go at the front.

You quote the 99-04 period where we had 7 teams challenging for race wins and poles. Much greater difference. Teams could like Jordan, Renault, Williams and BAR came from the midfield to challenge at the front at one time or another.

sandman1347 wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Well that's what I've been saying 90% of these posts are basically people being unhappy about Mercedes winning yet again, if another team were winning to break their winning streak then I doubt the state of F1 would be seen as such a big problem.

I've had a look and Ferrari have close to a third of the F1 fan base, good luck with replacing all those fans.

But it is Mercedes who are winning again.

What size % of the fan base does competitive racing have? Also, just because someone says they are a Ferrari fan doesn't mean they will stop watching F1 if Ferrari no longer compete in it. You're a Hamilton fan. Will you stop watching F1 when he retires?

I want Ferrari to stay but I don't think Liberty should feel trapped by the fear of them leaving. If it happens it happens.

Which is my point that F1 is broken because one particular team is dominating again, if another team was dominating to break the Mercedes domination then all of a sudden F1 is no longer broken.

I have always been a driver fan rather than a fan of teams so I can't speak for them, I would say overall I'm a F1 fan but some fans watch for specific reasons, how many Spanish fans will continue to watch now Alonso has gone, Barcelona has already being dropped for that reason. Same with the Polish Kubica fans who probably stopped watch en masse when Kubica got injured, I daresay it could be a similar situation with Ferrari fans?

The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

That's not accurate at all though is it? It has not been 5 years with the same rules at all. There was a radical change to the aero regs in 2017 and a more modest change for this year. The fact is that this type of change generally signals a change in the pecking order and if you pay attention; that has been the case here too. In 2014; Ferrari were nowhere. Williams and Red Bull were the next strongest teams after Mercedes. In 2015, Ferrari surged to the fore; becoming the second strongest team but by 2016, arguably, Red Bull surpassed them or at least matched them. In 2017-2018 we had Ferrari reach par with Mercedes after the aero change and this year they have regressed again.

The bottom line is that, despite frequent changes to the rules, Mercedes are the team that have consistently done the best job of adapting and designing a strong car. To suggest that they have kept the rules stagnant is simply inaccurate. We have never had such a volatile period of regulations changes in the history of F1. The other teams have simply not performed as well as Mercedes.

You don't actually have to go back very far to find a similar period of dominance. Ferrari from 1999-2004 was much the same. It was the tire reg change in 2005 that finally got their number.

Well I did say it was " almost identical" & I was mainly referring to the 5 years ( Edit - should be 6 yrs) with these engine regs simply because privateer teams have had control of their own destiny when it comes to their aero regs. Not so with the engines.

2016 did indeed see RB finish 2nd ahead of Ferrari by 70 pts but 1 swallow doesn't make a summer.

I agree Merc have done a brilliant job, that's clear to see, but it's also clear to see that the tight regulations coupled with the engine they're using is harming the competitive & parity aspects of the sport & as I stated in another post, I have absolutely no qualms at all with a team being dominant as long as I know they're playing the same game under the same rules as everyone else in the field.

Siao7 wrote:F1 was always open top and (nearly) always open wheeled.

That's true, but is it actually a reason it has to remain that way?

Jezza13 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

Jezza13 wrote:
The sports not broken because Merc are dominating. The sports broken because the current regs & political situation makes it nigh on impossible for anyone to catch up. I've never minded a team dominating as long as I knew that there was a chance another team, or any other team, could potentially match it with them. That's not the case with the sport at the moment. The pecking order is almost identical as it was 5 yrs ago, with the main exception being Williams dramatic fall from grace.

It's now the 5th year with these regs & Merc are a perfect 1-2 in every race. One could argue the reason Ferrari aren't closer is mainly down to their mistakes, & there is some merit in that, but RB are as far away from Merc as they've ever been, maybe even slightly further than last year, & the rest are still just making up the numbers.

As for Ferrari, while they might kick & moan, i'd doubt they'd leave. Ferrari needs F1 probably more than F1 needs Ferrari. If them, or anyone for that matter, left & as a result F1 could deliver a better product, then personally i'm ok with that. Where would they go anyway? WEC? Indy? Never. A breakaway series? It'd never get off the ground. Quit racing altogether? I highly doubt that. From my point of view, Ferrari needs to compete in the premier motor sport category on the planet, and if Ferrari walked because Liberty wanted to level the playing ground to attempt to make a better product, then I think a majority of fans would see it for what it was & continue watching anyway.

I'm a McLaren fan at heart, & now a Renault fan for convenience, but mostly i'm a F1 fan. For the life of me I can't explain why I like it, but I do & if McLaren decided to finish up at the end of the season, i'll still watch next season with maybe a new favourite team & I think that's the way most fans are. We love the sport 1st & foremost & support teams & drivers as a by - product of that. The Tifosi might be a different kettle of fish, but for Ferrari supporters outside Italy, I'd wager most would keep tuning in.

That's not accurate at all though is it? It has not been 5 years with the same rules at all. There was a radical change to the aero regs in 2017 and a more modest change for this year. The fact is that this type of change generally signals a change in the pecking order and if you pay attention; that has been the case here too. In 2014; Ferrari were nowhere. Williams and Red Bull were the next strongest teams after Mercedes. In 2015, Ferrari surged to the fore; becoming the second strongest team but by 2016, arguably, Red Bull surpassed them or at least matched them. In 2017-2018 we had Ferrari reach par with Mercedes after the aero change and this year they have regressed again.

The bottom line is that, despite frequent changes to the rules, Mercedes are the team that have consistently done the best job of adapting and designing a strong car. To suggest that they have kept the rules stagnant is simply inaccurate. We have never had such a volatile period of regulations changes in the history of F1. The other teams have simply not performed as well as Mercedes.

You don't actually have to go back very far to find a similar period of dominance. Ferrari from 1999-2004 was much the same. It was the tire reg change in 2005 that finally got their number.

Well I did say it was " almost identical" & I was mainly referring to the 5 years ( Edit - should be 6 yrs) with these engine regs simply because privateer teams have had control of their own destiny when it comes to their aero regs. Not so with the engines.

2016 did indeed see RB finish 2nd ahead of Ferrari by 70 pts but 1 swallow doesn't make a summer.

I agree Merc have done a brilliant job, that's clear to see, but it's also clear to see that the tight regulations coupled with the engine they're using is harming the competitive & parity aspects of the sport & as I stated in another post, I have absolutely no qualms at all with a team being dominant as long as I know they're playing the same game under the same rules as everyone else in the field.

The thing is; they have been surpassed in terms of engine performance as of 2018. The fact that a lot of fans and media seem incapable of absorbing that information doesn't change the fact that that's what has happened. There is nothing about their engine that makes them unbeatable nor is there anything about the rules that makes them unbeatable. They are just doing a better job (and of course they are spending the most money). Cost control (if they can find an effective way to implement it) might be the way to clip their wings a bit but there is no regulations change that will "fix" this. The reg changes have come and gone and Mercedes have done the best job of exploiting them. I don't know what you mean when you suggest that they are not playing by the same rules as everyone else but I assure you that they are.

It's been stated here already but: tyres and engines.
I've no qualms with tyres that are designed not to last an entire race but the level of management required is ridiculous. How difficult can it be to design a tyre that will allow for a pit strategy that means, for example, a driver can race flat out for 25 laps, pit, and race flat-out for the next 35 laps?
I was a big fan of the hybrid idea but the implementation has not been a success in my opinion. Far too complex, meaning far too expensive and little scope to correct a design if it is flawed - Honda's introduction is a case in point. How can you persuade engine suppliers to get involved under those restrictions?
There are other items that could do with a once-over (aero being a primary one) but those are the 'biggies' as far as I am concerned.

myattitude wrote:My idea for F1 is to be what F1 historically has been - the pursuit of ultimate performance. All the attempts to slow the cars down has meant that technology has outgrown F1 and the sport no longer has that "wow" factor it had when it was at the cutting edge.

Formula 1 competition should be made into this:



I've been arguing this for nearly ten years now. All the "reasons it can't be done" are nothing more than obstacles to resolve - and what could be more F1 than that?

The problem is that we could now make cars that the driver couldn't drive. The Chaparral 2J vacuum car showed that you could suck the car to the ground. Add wings to that and you can have massive downforce at all speeds. Add rocket or jet power with variable direction nozzles (like a Harrier VTO Jet) and you could be going round corners with G forces the driver couldn't cope with. Computers can drive the car better than any driver, so the driver would be an unconscious passenger on some sort of life support system. Then you have to build a circuit that would cope with the top speeds and cornering speed. Then you have to put the spectators so far away in case of an accident that they would have to watch the race on screens.

Exediron wrote:

Siao7 wrote:F1 was always open top and (nearly) always open wheeled.

That's true, but is it actually a reason it has to remain that way?

Not sure why not? This is the type of car that they are racing, why change it?

babararacucudada wrote:

myattitude wrote:My idea for F1 is to be what F1 historically has been - the pursuit of ultimate performance. All the attempts to slow the cars down has meant that technology has outgrown F1 and the sport no longer has that "wow" factor it had when it was at the cutting edge.

Formula 1 competition should be made into this:



I've been arguing this for nearly ten years now. All the "reasons it can't be done" are nothing more than obstacles to resolve - and what could be more F1 than that?

The problem is that we could now make cars that the driver couldn't drive. The Chaparral 2J vacuum car showed that you could suck the car to the ground. Add wings to that and you can have massive downforce at all speeds. Add rocket or jet power with variable direction nozzles (like a Harrier VTO Jet) and you could be going round corners with G forces the driver couldn't cope with. Computers can drive the car better than any driver, so the driver would be an unconscious passenger on some sort of life support system. Then you have to build a circuit that would cope with the top speeds and cornering speed. Then you have to put the spectators so far away in case of an accident that they would have to watch the race on screens.

They are certainly issues but as I said, those correct issues you raise are just challenges to resolve and not reasons it can't be done.

Take the G forces issue - G suits will be needed and developed to cope with the demands of keeping the driver going while still making it lightweight, compact and fireproof. How fun a challenge would that be for both the engineers as well as the viewers who get to see it? The wow factor of the overall spectacle would make F1 what F1 historically has been - the cutting edge of technology and creative performance (as opposed to stunted tyres, fuel deltas and regulated bodywork).

On the circuits issue - Yes even the Tilkedromes would have too small runoffs. You would need to redesign an open plot like Bahrain to accommodate the runoff needed for a tyre blowout.

The spectators issue - One option is to place the spectators on the inside of the corners instead of the outside where they currently sit. That way cars going off will hurtle away from the stands instead of towards them. Another option is for spectators to use their modern 50x zoom Huawei phones which, much as I hate people staring into devices, is what fans do today. Or maybe you have localise the stands to the slow parts of the track.

The biggest issue for me is the costs - But teams will only spend what they can afford, it will be self containing and will encourage designer talent over money. Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull are all already in the same ballpark of funding, and are already without a budget cap.

These are a few of the challenges and my responses may not necessarily be the correct answers to them, but the point is that any of these obstacles are just issues to resolve, not deal killers. I see it being a massive spectacle.

myattitude wrote:

babararacucudada wrote:

myattitude wrote:My idea for F1 is to be what F1 historically has been - the pursuit of ultimate performance. All the attempts to slow the cars down has meant that technology has outgrown F1 and the sport no longer has that "wow" factor it had when it was at the cutting edge.

Formula 1 competition should be made into this:



I've been arguing this for nearly ten years now. All the "reasons it can't be done" are nothing more than obstacles to resolve - and what could be more F1 than that?

The problem is that we could now make cars that the driver couldn't drive. The Chaparral 2J vacuum car showed that you could suck the car to the ground. Add wings to that and you can have massive downforce at all speeds. Add rocket or jet power with variable direction nozzles (like a Harrier VTO Jet) and you could be going round corners with G forces the driver couldn't cope with. Computers can drive the car better than any driver, so the driver would be an unconscious passenger on some sort of life support system. Then you have to build a circuit that would cope with the top speeds and cornering speed. Then you have to put the spectators so far away in case of an accident that they would have to watch the race on screens.

They are certainly issues but as I said, those correct issues you raise are just challenges to resolve and not reasons it can't be done.

Take the G forces issue - G suits will be needed and developed to cope with the demands of keeping the driver going while still making it lightweight, compact and fireproof. How fun a challenge would that be for both the engineers as well as the viewers who get to see it? The wow factor of the overall spectacle would make F1 what F1 historically has been - the cutting edge of technology and creative performance (as opposed to stunted tyres, fuel deltas and regulated bodywork).

On the circuits issue - Yes even the Tilkedromes would have too small runoffs. You would need to redesign an open plot like Bahrain to accommodate the runoff needed for a tyre blowout.

The spectators issue - One option is to place the spectators on the inside of the corners instead of the outside where they currently sit. That way cars going off will hurtle away from the stands instead of towards them. Another option is for spectators to use their modern 50x zoom Huawei phones which, much as I hate people staring into devices, is what fans do today. Or maybe you have localise the stands to the slow parts of the track.

The biggest issue for me is the costs - But teams will only spend what they can afford, it will be self containing and will encourage designer talent over money. Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull are all already in the same ballpark of funding, and are already without a budget cap.

These are a few of the challenges and my responses may not necessarily be the correct answers to them, but the point is that any of these obstacles are just issues to resolve, not deal killers. I see it being a massive spectacle.

Safety considerations may be the limiter. Art Arfons built his Green Monster car for $10,000 and it's top speed average was 576mph in 1965. He crashed the car at 610 mph.
The Budweiser rocket car was the first to break the sound barrier in 1979. The acceleration burst a disc in the driver's neck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgMFdxmh1aU
You don't have to spend a huge amount to go fast, but it's difficult to stay alive.

Single element wings - front and rear. Get rid of all the barge board bits and pieces. If we have to have a Halo - it needs to be spec with no aero add on's. Get rid of the fuel flow restrictions to the ICE's. Get rid of the restrictions on the available electrical power use. Get rid of the 3 engines per year rules. An engine to last two races is fine - the engines need to be operated at a stress level. If there is a 15K rev limiter - they need to be hitting the limiter on the track - no more short shifting to make the engines last 7 races.

1. Remove front and rear wings
2. Remove "Blue Flags"
3. One tire compound (plus immediate and full wets, of course)

TheBlackFlag wrote:1. Remove front and rear wings
2. Remove "Blue Flags"
3. One tire compound (plus immediate and full wets, of course)

This video does a perfect job of illustrating why banning blue flags is not the wonderful idea people seem to think it is. Instead of sorting the men from the boys by showing who has the cajones to pass, what it would actually do is put the decision squarely on the shoulders of the backmarker in question, giving them the opportunity to let certain drivers pass while holding others up. In the current era of B teams, the effect would be even worse than it was in the past.

I understand your concern, but Jean-Pierre Jarie is a bad example. He raced during my era and he was a complete moron. If back-markers stay on the racing line and the leaders have to get their tires dirty to go around them it will spice up the racing considerably. Will it be perfect? No.

Will it be a significant improvement? I believe so.

I don't mind the idea of removing blue flags but I don't think it's possible to do it while you have junior teams.