Entertainment & Commerce vs Purity of Racing

[WhiteBlue]

I just came across some comments that got me thinking:

I think there is good reason to close the pits in the current regulation, because cars are not refueled it means there shouldn't be a case where a driver must pit during a closed period, or run out of fuel. But the problem I have with that is that it takes away the 'luck of the draw' element, which I find interesting.

Obviously they (tyres) shouldn't be designed to fail, but quick reduction in tyre performance after some time would help a great deal. Why can't the FIA look into tyres made of 2 compounds. An upper layer that is extremely soft for high grip, and under that a hard but slippery rubber that will get you nowhere if you decide to keep running them.

I sense a desire for entertainment features that bring a certain conflict with the purity of open wheel racing in the traditional form that was exercised in the 60ties, 70ties and 80ties. Since the middle of the 90ties we have also seen a huge increase of the commercial powers in F1 mainly expressed by the power of FOM to dictate the specifications of race tracks and select tracks that are commercially optimized. The rule making commissions and working groups are more concerned with the "show" than the "sport" in order to make more money and increase revenues. Perhaps I explain what I consider obstacles to pure racing.

• no short races of 200 or 250 km as proposed by some teams
• no more abolishing and mutilation of old race tracks for TV purposes like Hockenheim
• no refuling stops that allow sprint races and encourage drivers to wait for pit stops to pass
• no reverse grids or split races
• no race fuel qualifying which masks the true top speed capability of the cars and drivers and devalue pole position
• no artificial tyre stops to expand strategy options and create a talking point for the tyre supplier
• no artificial lottery for "free" pit stops during safety car periods
• no proximity wing exclusively for the driver behind
• no push to pass by KERS or other means
• no unnecessary slow corners to create TV advertising opportunities
• no excessive downforce that prevents slipstreaming and lets drivers take fast corners flat
• no third cars or satellite teams
• no driver aids such as ABS, ESP, TC and launch control

I'm sure some people can come up with other points which I have not mentioned. Since 1993 F1 has tried many changes that oppose the philosophy of pure F1 racing and only lately we have seen a return of some features like low fuel qualifying and the refueling ban which seem to bring us back to a more traditional form of racing.

The features which we call gimmicks or commercial enhancers may be of interest to the uneducated occasional TV viewers but they do little for fans of the sport.

Pure racing for me is not about drivers that have to operate a steering wheel with thirty buttons and dials, an F-duct, a brake bias lever, active wing control and KERS! Drivers should master the traditional race craft of controling the car with steering wheel and the pedals in all kinds of situations. They also should be masters of managing tyre wear, situational awareness, defensive driving, dealing with slower traffic and close wheel to wheel racing always leaving the opponent room on the track according to the rules.

Everything that detracts from those sporting qualities like gimmicks, GPS and computer aided strategies produces the wrong qualities in the drivers. Do we want babies that are remote controlled by their race engineer and win because they were at the right place in the right time or do we want drivers who win because they are quick, capable and know to use their own brain?

I am convinced that F1 will will have enough spectators and TV viewers if the commercial side focusses on getting a good mix of team, driver and circuit nationalities. Schumacher and Alonso in my view have done more to promote F1 commercially than some of the gimmicks that were invented to increase the "show". If FOM focusses on the US, India, Russia and Chinese markets by involving manufacturers, circuits and teams F1 will still find huge growth potential.

Ok, enough of the rant and let me know what you think of those ideas.

[l4mbch0ps]

I agree with the desire to produce good racing - obviously racing is what we're all here for.

I also agree with the reduction of out and out commercial grabs (slow corners) and "passing modifiers" like the proximity wing.

But what i never want to see leave F1, and it seems like there has been a increase of it lately, is the cars running systems that are less than what they are capable of, technically. Some times, it gets crazy - and that's when restrictions are appropriate - but we have to be very gentle with technical restrictions in F1, i think, because you dance on a dangerous line.

My other concern with this, a point that i often raise when talking to my F1 fan friends, because we're all quite in-depth in our appreciation of the technical side: Most F1 fans don't know squat about F1. There, i said it. It sucks, but it's the basic truth of nearly anything complicated - Most people don't really know how it works, but watch it cause it's shiny. It's a small minority that are able to appreciate and understand the sport to the level of, say, participants of this board. Even 100,000 members is a very small minority of the (i've heard as high as) Billion F1 fans.

P.T. Barnum, i believe: "You'll never lose money underestimating the intelligence of the general public."

[machin]

I think you have to strike a balance:-

F1 is F1 because it has the best teams/drivers in the world driving the fastest cars in the world.

This requires money -the best drivers and teams inevitably migrate towards the big money championships.... most of that money comes from advertising... However, the only way of getting money from advertising is by ensuring that lots of people watch F1 and care about F1.

So you have to make sure that F1 is enjoyable enough to attract the fans (not just the tech nerds like ourselves)... If you neglect the fans (and advertising) you'll sign the death blow to F1.... The FIA & FOTA realise this and therefore have to make changes...

[machin]

Oh, WB; what's not "pure" about a starting grid based on a reverse championship order?

[gridwalker]

How about reintroducing the traditional "Le Mans" starting procedure?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvqRBNqhSzs[/youtube]

You can't get much more purist than that

[WhiteBlue]

How about reintroducing the traditional "Le Mans" starting procedure?

You can't get much more purist than that

The wink indicates that you know it. Drivers can't belt themselves into their cars. Besides, it's a sports car tradition.

Reverse grids I simply see as a gimmick to produce artificial passes. It has no tradition or place in F1.

[machin]

Reverse grids I simply see as a gimmick to produce artificial passes. It has no tradition or place in F1

Good point... the FIA/FOTA should also re-introdue skinny tyres, front engines with prop shafts running under the driver, aluminium fuel tanks, drum brakes and remove the safety belts... oh and KERS? Where's the tradition in that???!

Oh and of course today's short tracks should be replaced with long ones with big gaps between the marshalls posts....

Then we can have the old F1 back!!!


(just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean that's a good reason not to do it in the future)