Perfect racing - Designing the perfect racing series

[flynfrog]

1: Car must fit into a 2meter by 3 meter box
2: must have no body covering the front and rear edge of the tires as seen from above

F1 =

no we have body work covering our tires

[Conceptual]

That is my point Check, it isnt the teams wasting the potential, it is the FIA and their "view" of what the regulations should be.

Also, it would need its own catergory since the other series catergory doesnt allow for sub-topic postings.

Hey, it is a dream, and obviously not one shared by too many on here.

I'll just let it drop unless someone else steps in and wants to help make it happen.

Chris

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, I figured from the beginning this was mainly FIA critic.

Now, if we could orientate this thing towards creativity...

Mabybe Flyn is pointing a way: post something original. I dare to say we've heard many times what's wrong with FIA, but few new proposals. I'd say that the ratio of critics to contributors have increased a lot...

Here are mine; weird, but mine. I haven't read them anywhere, mainly because I'm writing them as they ocurr to me.

- First, this is called the Racing Syndicate. I'd go for swedish laws... because I'm thinking of a labor-oriented championship. Follow me for a second and, please, try to imagine if the current problems F1 has, (all come from money disputes, if you ask me) can be resolved this way: through organizational rules, not through mechanical regulations, which are arbitrary and transient.

- Only members of the Racing Syndicate can compete, by gettin a RS license, open to anybody.

- There are two kinds of members: individuals (drivers or "natural persons") and mechanical teams (legal persons). There are no contracts among mechanics and drivers, all contracts are with RS.

- First year, by lot, following years by "best mechanical team pick the first driver and so on", drivers are chosen from the pool by mechanics, the same way you picked people when going to play football or baseball at your local sandlot.

- First year they race on karts. If the championship is successful and money starts to flow, then we can change mechanical regulations to allow more sophisticated machines. Money flow is essential: no fan base at the tracks means no money for cars. Check the last regulation proposed to understand where the money comes from... but, please, continue in order, if you wish.

- All drivers with a contract who are recruited for other series have to pay a percentage of their new contract to RS. This money is used for racing schools at the national level, only for people under 18. These schools are oriented toward safety and towards teaching people that you only race at a track. There is an effort to blend this schools with the national traffic authorities to provide driver licenses earlier to participants in the racing schools (I've proposed that many times, including the national authorities in Colombia).

- Regional competitions are held first. Then, the finalists (more on an original scoring system in the paragraph below: a simple, unbiased one) compete for the World Championship. This probably means that the WC is held every two or four years.

- There is no points system. All championships are decided by aggregated times. People that fails to end the race are given a time based on the last bunch of drivers that complete the race.

- Grid positions are decided by lot.

- Mechanics form their own independent College of Mechanics. They publish the Technical Rules.

- Older drivers and mechanics have the role of marshalls. They have their own College of Marshalls, independent. They publish the Sporting Rules.

- Civil engineers and automotive engineers who race as mechanics or drivers decide on safety regulations in the College of Designers. They publish the Safety Rules.

- All revisions of the rules are made before the next round of local championships.

- All the money for prizes comes from tickets and TV. There are no sponsors. Mechanical regulations hinge on that: you cannot develop something that cannot be financed in a reasonable way.

- Money is distributed among drivers and mechanical teams according to the number of competitions in which they participate, not according to your position. You race for fame, not for money. Money goes only to those that work.

- The administration (Colleges) can use only 5% (or some other number) of the total money for their work. Tracks receive another fixed percentage, based on the investments they've made on the tracks. The rest of the money goes to prizes for mechanics and drivers.

I could go on and on. You've seen my posts about "positions held by direct election of members": democracy and more democracy, no committees of unkown people. The last one:

- People classifies for nationals as you classify for American Idol: open to anyone, best times give you the pool of drivers for the National Championship.

Well, that's some fresh air, I wish. I strongly believe that all the discontent expressed on the criticisms to regulations comes from the lack of transparency and the fact that this is a "money milking machine" for a few people.

You know, I don't believe into ressolving problems, I prefer to "dissolve" them, if you follow my drift. You have to make the problem to cease to exist, to lose its meaning because it's totally forgotten, not simply confronted.

[checkered]

Now, if we could orientate this thing towards creativity...

I dare to say we've heard many times what's wrong with FIA, but few new proposals.

You've seen my posts about "positions held by direct election of members": democracy and more democracy, no committees of unkown people.

Well, that's some fresh air, I wish. I strongly believe that all the discontent expressed on the criticisms to regulations comes from the lack of transparency and the fact that this is a "money milking machine" for a few people.

This has led me to think not about what the rules should be but what, and how, rules are.

Well, if Ciro's post

isn't a beatiful example of what I was looking for since this thread started, then I don't know what is. I would've formulated some things differently but that consideration is completely dwarfed compared to a general framework of democracy and creativity being supported, where wonderful, evolving and sustainable constructions can flourish in an environment that is elementally, all pervasively discoursive. Where rules serve us and not vice versa. Are you perhaps inspired by what has happened in Medellín in the last few years and what Sergio Fajardo has enabled in that time? I know I am.


Children enjoy a newly built library in Santo Domingo Savio. Image linked from architecturelb.wordpress.com, originally taken by Scott Dalton for the NY Times.

Reading through your post, I immediately thought of one upcoming racing series that at least on the surface of it shares at least some of your ideals. I'm rooting for them, even if they're barely off the ground at this point. Follow the link, perhaps you'll see what I mean. I'll include the link in the "Alternative engines & ICE developments" thread, too, since I intended to do so anyway. You just caught me unprepared, since I need to pace myself a bit. One of the reasons I just arbitrarily wrote this earlier on:

Also, be aware that even at this time there are people who are invested in what you are suggesting, in very real terms.

Images linked from formulazero.nl

[url=http://www.formulazero.nl/pagina/home/detail/home]FORMULAZERO - link[/url]

Edit: Hm ... "Formula Zero" and "Formula Ciro" even sound the same!

[Conceptual]

Too bad the world ends on 12/21/12...

Is there a serious discussion possibility on this topic, or are we just having fun still?

Chris

[Ciro Pabón]

Too bad the world ends on 12/21/12...

Is there a serious discussion possibility on this topic, or are we just having fun still?

Chris

Well, I'll race you in heaven... At least, we can be sure some of the more prominent members of FIA won't be there.

Now, this is serious and we're having fun, as usual.

[Conceptual]

If it is serious, can we ask F1T.net to set up a stand alone forum for it? I would hate to make a different one and pull members from this forum. I'm sure that the owners would greatly dislike losing traffic and their sponsorship...

Who is the person to ask for that?

Chris

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, the girl is Principessa, for approval, or Tomba (Steven de Groote) for implementation, (our sole forum owners, administrators, redactors, financists and managers ). Tomba has a thread, entitled "What would you add to F1Technical?", running right now (as usual).

I think a thread like this would be enough.

Actually, I would try to adapt FIA texts.

For example, the sporting code, so general and so aplicable to ANY series, that talks about "good" things, like sportmanship, is good for starters. I would do some surgery on the first chapter, which deals with FIA organization, but for the rest, I fail to see major differences. This are Da Rulez, recently updated (19 November) in case someone hasn't read them:

International Sporting Code of the International Federation of the Automobile. It's international, get it?

The format they have, to highlight new rules, is to cross the old words and write after them the new words in pink.

So, all we need is to translate the rules to Word format, for example, and post it on some public site, like Google Pages or FaceBook.

Anyone is free to send modifications to this thread, and the most interested member (I postulate Conceptual... ) then incorporates them into the text and republish it. This member is the Speaker of the House: he deals with all kind of weirdos, like me.

I imagine that for people to worry about redacting regulations, you should have an agreement with three groups of people: media, car owners (or mechanics, as I called them) and track owners. You need a concept of a championship that has something into it. My proposal is good (ehem... ) for Libertarians, Socialists and other "ists", who I imagine tend to be poor enough to be able to race... so, I'll put it into the "no fly zone", anyway.

If what we want is to change some mechanical regulations on FIA championship (that is a purpose noble enough), then we should adress our concerns to our national association (in my case, the Colombian Automobile Club, which is less than egregious and influential at the World Council ).

We could (given an astoundingly good idea, don't count on me for that) start some letter for people to sign "in the Internets" and then pass it to the most rebellious association or to FIA itself.

Anyway the concept MUST say something about racing, something close to the heart of the people, and thus, be finanacially viable or politically necessary. Of course, your nick says you already understand that.

Before you reach that commitment, from many people, the only purpose is to disseminate new ideas on the Net. For that, the format we have is more than enough. I imagine that for each person that posts, there are three or five or ten that reads the post, or, at least, I write for them in my imagination. Hello, guys!

[Belatti]

here there is a "neightbour" thread that has lot of info regarding this one...

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4825&start=60

If conceptual suceeds in creating a new topic, each thread in it should be for each rule, with a polls so forum members vote to decide each rule

That would bring the democracy F1 and FIA lacks nowdays

[Conceptual]

here there is a "neightbour" thread that has lot of info regarding this one...

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4825&start=60

If conceptual suceeds in creating a new topic, each thread in it should be for each rule, with a polls so forum members vote to decide each rule

That would bring the democracy F1 and FIA lacks nowdays

I perfectly agree. That is why it would need its own forum to hold the few dozen topics seperately so there can be some coherence to the discussion.

I'm going to PM the mod right now to ask for this...

Chris

[flynfrog]

Well, I figured from the beginning this was mainly FIA critic.

Now, if we could orientate this thing towards creativity...

Mabybe Flyn is pointing a way: post something original. I dare to say we've heard many times what's wrong with FIA, but few new proposals. I'd say that the ratio of critics to contributors have increased a lot...

Here are mine; weird, but mine. I haven't read them anywhere, mainly because I'm writing them as they ocurr to me.

- First, this is called the Racing Syndicate. I'd go for swedish laws... because I'm thinking of a labor-oriented championship. Follow me for a second and, please, try to imagine if the current problems F1 has, (all come from money disputes, if you ask me) can be resolved this way: through organizational rules, not through mechanical regulations, which are arbitrary and transient.

- Only members of the Racing Syndicate can compete, by gettin a RS license, open to anybody.

- There are two kinds of members: individuals (drivers or "natural persons") and mechanical teams (legal persons). There are no contracts among mechanics and drivers, all contracts are with RS.

- First year, by lot, following years by "best mechanical team pick the first driver and so on", drivers are chosen from the pool by mechanics, the same way you picked people when going to play football or baseball at your local sandlot.

- First year they race on karts. If the championship is successful and money starts to flow, then we can change mechanical regulations to allow more sophisticated machines. Money flow is essential: no fan base at the tracks means no money for cars. Check the last regulation proposed to understand where the money comes from... but, please, continue in order, if you wish.

- All drivers with a contract who are recruited for other series have to pay a percentage of their new contract to RS. This money is used for racing schools at the national level, only for people under 18. These schools are oriented toward safety and towards teaching people that you only race at a track. There is an effort to blend this schools with the national traffic authorities to provide driver licenses earlier to participants in the racing schools (I've proposed that many times, including the national authorities in Colombia).

- Regional competitions are held first. Then, the finalists (more on an original scoring system in the paragraph below: a simple, unbiased one) compete for the World Championship. This probably means that the WC is held every two or four years.

- There is no points system. All championships are decided by aggregated times. People that fails to end the race are given a time based on the last bunch of drivers that complete the race.

- Grid positions are decided by lot.

- Mechanics form their own independent College of Mechanics. They publish the Technical Rules.

- Older drivers and mechanics have the role of marshalls. They have their own College of Marshalls, independent. They publish the Sporting Rules.

- Civil engineers and automotive engineers who race as mechanics or drivers decide on safety regulations in the College of Designers. They publish the Safety Rules.

- All revisions of the rules are made before the next round of local championships.

- All the money for prizes comes from tickets and TV. There are no sponsors. Mechanical regulations hinge on that: you cannot develop something that cannot be financed in a reasonable way.

- Money is distributed among drivers and mechanical teams according to the number of competitions in which they participate, not according to your position. You race for fame, not for money. Money goes only to those that work.

- The administration (Colleges) can use only 5% (or some other number) of the total money for their work. Tracks receive another fixed percentage, based on the investments they've made on the tracks. The rest of the money goes to prizes for mechanics and drivers.

I could go on and on. You've seen my posts about "positions held by direct election of members": democracy and more democracy, no committees of unkown people. The last one:

- People classifies for nationals as you classify for American Idol: open to anyone, best times give you the pool of drivers for the National Championship.

Well, that's some fresh air, I wish. I strongly believe that all the discontent expressed on the criticisms to regulations comes from the lack of transparency and the fact that this is a "money milking machine" for a few people.

You know, I don't believe into ressolving problems, I prefer to "dissolve" them, if you follow my drift. You have to make the problem to cease to exist, to lose its meaning because it's totally forgotten, not simply confronted.

I think the main problems with almost all racing series is taht the rule books get thicker every year they have stifled almost all inovation look at the first half of the last century of racing very rule lots of different ideas.

Ive alos posted the idea of making the track the rule book on here.

run what ever you want for a car. If you are looking to limit areo add grates in the corners negating the diffuser tire war getting out of hand coat the track with something.

any way off to bed for the night

[Tom]

Well here's a ruddy marvelous idea.

Mark out a course here made up of at least 50km, featuring tight and twisty, fast and smooth and maybe even a 'threading a needle' section, here.
The course will be clearly marked and include a limitless series of checkpoints (the number of which the competitors cannot know) and a GPS system will enforce each competitor passes through each cheackpoint in the correct order.

The cost to enter is $10,000US, a $10,000,000US prize will be awarded for the vehicle best meeting the catagories:
Efficient,
Safe,
Quick,
Controllable,
Cost Effective and
Most Ingenuitive.
This will be judged by a panel of 7 judges (representing each continent, Africa, Antarctica Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, South America.) These judges must have a background in Law and Engineering. There will be a team consisting of 10 Engineers to provide evidence and studies of each vehicle entered into the event.

To compete each vehicle must go through a series of tests to ensure it is safe to race. These will be decided at a later date.
The start is staggered around the course with each competitor at least 1km apart, depending on entry size. The race will be against the clock to complete 3 whole laps from the respective starting point. It is a strictly no contact sport and, due to the nature of vehicles likely to compete, the slightest rub must be treated very seriously.
No entry must consist of more than 75% of a vehicle already in existance.

Sponsors must not include cigarette advertising. Alcohol sponsorship will be heavily censored. The race, which will take place at least once a year, must be televised live. Grandstands and spectator areas will be arranged at certain SAFE vantage points around the course. Due to the nature of the terrain medical intervention must be airbourne and available on the scene within 2 minutes of any incident.


I'm sure there are many glaring faults with this plan but on the whole it seems quite good for a very 'on the spot' idea. Your thought and criticisms please.

[Tomba]

Well we're now officially official. Conceptual started with a great idea for us making our own racing series by setting out the rules and try to do better than the FIA.

My idea would be to go for a single seater, open wheel series but I would assume it would be interesting if all of you just started a thread with prefix [Perfect racing] if you'd have a proposal on how to make this series more interesting. That can vary from night races, no front wings, covered cockpits, ...

Also note that for F1 rules discussion you should not be here but in the Formula One category

[flynfrog]

Well here's a ruddy marvelous idea.

Mark out a course here made up of at least 50km, featuring tight and twisty, fast and smooth and maybe even a 'threading a needle' section, here.
The course will be clearly marked and include a limitless series of checkpoints (the number of which the competitors cannot know) and a GPS system will enforce each competitor passes through each cheackpoint in the correct order.

The cost to enter is $10,000US, a $10,000,000US prize will be awarded for the vehicle best meeting the catagories:
Efficient,
Safe,
Quick,
Controllable,
Cost Effective and
Most Ingenuitive.
This will be judged by a panel of 7 judges (representing each continent, Africa, Antarctica Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, South America.) These judges must have a background in Law and Engineering. There will be a team consisting of 10 Engineers to provide evidence and studies of each vehicle entered into the event.

To compete each vehicle must go through a series of tests to ensure it is safe to race. These will be decided at a later date.
The start is staggered around the course with each competitor at least 1km apart, depending on entry size. The race will be against the clock to complete 3 whole laps from the respective starting point. It is a strictly no contact sport and, due to the nature of vehicles likely to compete, the slightest rub must be treated very seriously.
No entry must consist of more than 75% of a vehicle already in existance.

Sponsors must not include cigarette advertising. Alcohol sponsorship will be heavily censored. The race, which will take place at least once a year, must be televised live. Grandstands and spectator areas will be arranged at certain SAFE vantage points around the course. Due to the nature of the terrain medical intervention must be airbourne and available on the scene within 2 minutes of any incident.


I'm sure there are many glaring faults with this plan but on the whole it seems quite good for a very 'on the spot' idea. Your thought and criticisms please.

none of that is racing?

Its sounds like a great design competition but not racing.

I never got the point of censuring adds either

[rymagik]

I know this isn't as well thought as the other posts, but a feature I would like to see in any racing series aimed towards replacing F1 is to understand just how much money is involved in F1. It's a HUGE amount and one of the primary issues between top teams and lower teams.

As such, I think looking at American Professional sports in recent years could help. I'm writing this mid-class, so forgive me if I'm throwing down useless ideas. For a long time, Major League Baseball was dominated by the teams that had the most money. The New York Yankee's are HATED because they've consistently built great teams through the free agency, basically they poached all the best players from around the league with offers for more money. No salary cap involved. A couple of years ago, the management of MLB implemented a revenue sharing system where teams that performed worse were given a proportionally larger piece of the revenue generated by the league. This tied EVERYONES revenue together, and helped to increase the budget of teams that couldn't compete, while not interfering with teams that WERE winning.

So in any series created, I would like to see a shared revenue system. This does not interfere with teams individual sponsorship. (I also feel that ad's should not be censured.) But series revenue from the season would be held and awarded at the end of the year and split among the teams inversely proportional to their finishing place. Teams would still receive monetary benefits from their Championship places, which would come from a pool set from a certain % of the series revenue. Of course, a certain % of the revenue would have to go back to the series itself...

Just a thought on how to deal with one of the critical problems of racing and a way to help balance the field. Everyone needs money to go racing. This would also mean that team finances would have to be documented and submitted. The monetary system of any racing system should be TRANSPARENT!