I can’t agree with the data sharing... Why would a team be forced to share (and loose) their competitive advantage? One team invests in designing or developing something new and then have to share it with the rest of the field? How is that fair or good for the sport?Zynerji wrote:BLUE:dans79 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:06 pmAs I've said several times now, F1 is first and foremost a Formula series, Though I'm really starting to believe very few people understand what that actually means.
In a Formula series a team at minimum designs and in some cases is required to manufacture all or substantial portions of their racing vehicle, doesn't mater if it's a car, boat or plane. In the Americas cup for example, most of the manufacturing is contracted out, but the teams still have custom unique designs. Thus, the competition is as much about the design and engineering as it is the actual racing.
In the case of F1, requiring data sharing removes 50% of the competition.
There is only ONE perfectly optimal solution to any given formula. Convergence is the nature of improvement in any Formula series.
The design and engineering competition stays the same with data-sharing, what it prevents is 2-3 teams overspending in R&D to gain advantage thus leading to several years' worth of boring domination, and a multi-tier formula.
Data-sharing only removes the competition of reverse-engineering. That is one that gives zero points, is hidden from the fans, and only exponentially increases the cost of being competitive.
Neither of those excuses actually counter my point.
You mention that you are a business man, do you also believe that patents shouldn’t be allowed? That IP should be banned? I mean, it should boost the economy and avoid companies from spending billions of dollars in R&D, right? More supply and therefore lower prices?... That’s how you hinder progress and evolution.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk