Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
What, if anything, could be done about the disparity between teams? I realize that this is nothing new or unique since it happens in many other sports categories but it makes the championship seem a little less special when there are only 3-4 teams winning on a regular basis. But what interests me the most is seeing three teams with ZERO points with seven races to go. What's the point of having them out there if they're not even competing with the rest of the point scoring teams? Mobile chicanes?
Upon further review of this situation, what if there was a time limit for them to get up to speed and even possible incentives. Let's say that they have X amount seasons to earn points or else they're ejected from the series? Incentives for most improved team based on points/standings?
Or perhaps this is just another part of life and F1 history that must continue as is without interruption...
Backmakers have always been part of F1. Best example is Minardi with 21 years in F1, 345 races and only 38 points. During the 80´s and 90´s you had also regularly more than 3 teams with zero points.
I agree.
They do tend to help make Q1 very busy though.
BTW didn't 5 challengers qualify outside 107% at Spa and still get to race?
WTF is that a rule or just a bluff?
What I never see in these discussions is what people think the drawback of having back markers is? Why should they not be there?
Re the 107% rule – it's very specific that they can be allowed to race if their practice times show that they can actually make the limit... That was the case at spa.
It wasn't until very recently that Williams had any points and they've scored far worse this season than the ex-Jordan and ex-Minardi teams, would anyone believe Williams should be ejected?
Incentives to get them in the points is a nice idea but that almost pre-supposes that they aren't trying to get there of their own accord. Others would argue they already have one, FOM money. Of the lowly teams Lotus appears to have been the only serious new team. Virgin - for all their effort have gone nowhere quickly and HRT has already swapped hands how many times and gained how many sponsors?
Arguably changing rules would help small teams. If you have the same rules not changing, the bigger teams can just build on their already-successful concept. If you change everything, the smaller teams can rely on their creativity.
matt21 wrote:Backmakers have always been part of F1. Best example is Minardi with 21 years in F1, 345 races and only 38 points. During the 80´s and 90´s you had also regularly more than 3 teams with zero points.
As I stated earlier I don't have a problem with the third tier cars being slower, it is to be expected. I do think it's worth acknowledging that in the 80's and 90's points were only awarded to p1-6 as they were in the vast majority of Minardi's running years. Apply that scale to this years scoring and 12 pilots would be in the points.
raymondu999 wrote:Arguably changing rules would help small teams. If you have the same rules not changing, the bigger teams can just build on their already-successful concept. If you change everything, the smaller teams can rely on their creativity.
It's absurd to have "back markers" there just for the sake of having some cars driving around to fill up the field, with no realistic shot of winning.
Honestly I think budget needs to be regulated for one. Second, I do believe it's good for the rules or specifications to be shaken up every few years.
Otherwise, how is a start up or smaller team supposed to enter the sport with any chance of doing well against someone who is (a) larger or (b) has additional YEARS of testing and chassis development for the current rule spec?
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.
I dont think budgets will do anything other than force the big boys elsewhere.
I think if you made manufacturers supply parts that they use current, then smaller guys would have access to higher grade parts for a specified price(FIA policed).
With the right combinations teams could be higher up the grid.
Look at Force India using a Mclaren rear end, and Merc engine. They could follow their own low drag concept and still be within 1.5 seconds or so off the Bulls.
First of all, they need to make the cars more difficult to drive, perhaps a little less safe as well.
The way things are now it's all about the car, I'm sure that Maldonado would qualify in the top six if he had an RBR.
Secondly, I think a true "flat bottom rule" and riddance of that hideous front-wing would limit the influence of aero-development, which should equal things considerably.
And look who's back, praise the Lord, let the Merc-bashing commence!
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
My idea is to give them more of a help, than tell them to improve ASAP or replace them ASAP.
Id like to see more done with larger teams either sharing facilities or giving the smaller teams a helping hand. What McLaren and Virgin are doing together or what Mercedes and Hispania have is also a good idea. Also what Team Lotus have with renault and Red Bull for technology and Williams for wind tunnel time is also what id be looking at.
Ideally each of the smaller teams should have a larger team help them to the point they can get to within a second of the more established teams is where id think about a cut off.
Personally, i think that for 2010 and 2011 each of the smaller teams should have been subsidised to the tune of €20m from FOM, but got no money for finishing P10 for those years in the Constructots table.
I think next year will see all of the smaller teams take a leap as rules are staying relativly stable, i think that Virgin will find a second to a second and a half, Team Lotus will have that second they need to get into the mid pack and Hispania will finally have a car they can test with without going to Australia cold and shaking down their car then, whitch should bring them a second or more as well.
Budgets have alot to do with it, but also resource management is also needed. Id be looking at shaking up the engine rules a little as well for the smaller teams, giving the smaller teams, either by giving them a higher RPM limit of 19,000 whitch will bring them performance and lap time with giving them another 2 engines per car if they havnt had a win within the last 2 or 3 years, whitch would bring the mid pack closer to the sharp end as well as Force India and Williams would also be granted more engines and a higher RPM mimit as well.
However i also think there should be limits on when teams can introduce their upgrades as well, limiting the upgrades to every 3 or 4 races as well, as this would give teams more time to analise and optomise what they have, whitch brings lap time. We have seen this at both Hispania and Mercedes last year.
As for the technichal regs of the sport, id like to see them ring fenced for a period of 2 or 3 years as well, no changes to the rules, unless there is a specific saftey need.
Id also like to ease the rules on customer cars, what id be doing is allowing the smaller teams to buy the IP for a chassis from a larger team for say €3m per chassis built, whitch would mean that a team could start with a IP budget of €9m before the chassis are built by an outside contractor. But id make it that the chassis has to be 3 year old tech, and cannot be bought from a team that came within the top 3 of the constructors table that year. So in effect, Hispania could have gone to Red Bull and purchaced the IP licence for the RB4, updated it for the 2011 regs and the Cosworth engine and then raced it, whitch would have given them at least 2 seconds or performance increase last year or this year as well.
It would also given them a car that can and will be a good baseline for the future. But by the future, the new teams can only do this for a period of 2 or 3 seasons, then they will not only have the base and experteese to build and develop their first propper car in the sport.
I think Team Lotus idea with the T127 last year was a good one, a update of a dated design to get the team on the grid and racing was a good idea, then develop it intensivly for the first 8 races then ditch it for a full focus on the new car is what Virgin and Hispania could and should have gone for.
I think its time for a re-think of the rules and support for the smaller teams, i think the sport should embrace them as they are where the next generation of the sport will eventually learn their trade and get the grounding in the sport they need.
xpensive wrote:First of all, they need to make the cars more difficult to drive, perhaps a little less safe as well.
Couldn't disagree more. Going in reverse order here... to intentionally making a racing vehicle less safe is irresponsible and outrageous. What is that going to accomplish? With the deaths of Senna, Ratzenberger, Villeneuve, Donahue... how many people were jumping up and down lauding the excitement and thrill?
With regarding to more difficult to drive, I am also in disagreement - though less vehemently. Do we want to reward good drivers? Yes - but this will be the case no matter what. Doesn't matter what the vehicle platform is. The best driver will be able to extract the most by finding the best line, driving most repeatedly, and extracting the most from the setup.
Making a car a --- box to drive is in my experience only going to make drivers hesitant to push and overtake. Not going to take the risk of losing all your points when you feel like the car is going to wreck every corner if you really go after it.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.
