Why the need for stringent regulations?

[Cam]

Here's Newey's thoughts:

Q: Do you find that frustrating or more of a challenge?
AN: Regulation restrictions like the lost exhaust are a bit frustrating in truth, because they are exactly that, they are restrictions, they’re not giving new opportunities or revenues particularly, they’re just closing a door. Regulation changes I enjoy, regulation restrictions I rather lament.

A key point he makes is: they’re not giving new opportunities or revenues particularly, they’re just closing a door.

My greatest hate of recent F1 is the changing of rules to increase the show as the sole reason. It's quite clear F1 is hurting financially and Newey is clearly saying "well, if we can't develop new things, we can't make money from them" - and that's a very good point indeed. F1 innovation (and implementation) has lead to many revenue making streams for the teams.

There's no 'magic bullet' to fix it, but F1 has always been about finding small improvements in lots of areas - for a whole gain. Yet they cannot put that thinking to the books?!

It's crazy for everyone to complain about the expenses, while constantly put in regulations that restrict teams abilities to make money.

[DaveKillens]

Dave,

Agree this is the case. But how can F1 move forward from here?

Sadly JET, I think the FIA has written itself into a corner. One obvious solution is to throw the book away and write a completely new one. But too many people have their fingers in the pie, from the FIA safety institute to the teams, to the investment bankers. As an example, Formula One is a money-making business for the money people, they like the current format, it makes money for them. They are willing to accept small tweaks, but unwilling to see their investment at risk just because a few people want to try something completely different.

And due to the sheer competitiveness between the teams, they are willing and able to argue and fight over the slightest rule interpretation. I followed the Mercedes saga about it's W-duct, and the protests. The arguments put forth by Brawn and Co. were definitely out of lawyer land, piles and piles of weird and convoluted arguments why it was "legal". How do you address just one little thing like that, write more rules, or attempt to simplify it all? So far, the normal procedure is to make additions to the regulations, and I expect that trend to continue into the future.

I sure miss the days when someone would show up with a weird and exciting concept, from the Tyrell six wheeler to the Brabahm fan car, and create a real buzz among the tech weenies. But sadly, those days in Formula One have been regulated away, and that kind of weird innovation happens in other places, such as LeMans.

[bhall]

I get nervous when I think about a complete rewrite of the rules. The last instance of such a radical shift produced the cars we see today that needlessly look like shovels.

Absent an FIA rules mandate like that employed by the ACO, I'd like to see a process of regulation elimination similar to that used in American jury selection. Give each team X number of "saves" and eliminate every regulation for which no one submits a "save." The process would stop when the teams are all out of "saves" or when there are simply no more regulations to eliminate.

It's an idea so simple that it couldn't possibly be realized.

[xpensive]

...
Absent an FIA rules mandate like that employed by the ACO, I'd like to see a process of regulation elimination similar to that used in American jury selection. Give each team X number of "saves" and eliminate every regulation for which no one submits a "save." The process would stop when the teams are all out of "saves" or when there are simply no more regulations to eliminate.
...

Something like a voting system perhaps, once a team has enough supporting votes they an downvote a regulation,
while MrE can downvote any regulation of his dislike regardless of support?

[bhall]

Now don't go taking the logic out of my carefully crafted premise. Each team would get X "saves" by virtue of their mere existence.

Of course, I would expect extensive bitching about the value of X.