Excellent exposition of your, and I guess many people’s, considered opinion.Phil wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 2:53 pmEvery race is a Grand Prix. A Grand price.
To win it, you must be the best [team combo]. Whoever sits on top of the podest on Sunday when the race is finished has earned it one way or another. Not speaking about the driver, but as him representing the team, the car, the entire organisation behind him. One might like this or not, but it's as it has always been in F1.
Every event is unique, because it's different, or at least, it used to be before most tracks became "tilke-designed". Some are street circuits where the emphasis is on being fastest on Saturday and not making any mistakes (Monaco), other circuits require hugh amounts of downforce for high speed cornering, others, like Monza, emphasize pure grunt and straight line performance with as little drag as possible. Every track is unique and poses a unique challenge - hence, why winning some tracks are perhaps more prestigious than others.
What is being discussed here, is changing this in favor for something entire different where the focus isn't in winning the grand prix on merit, but more in focus of a long running championship by artificially prolonging it's conclusion.
It won't work as people here are predicting, because there will always be some kind of required delta to fullfill a successfull overtake. If the pack moves closer together as a result of budget cap and more shared components, the performance differential between cars should in theory decrease. Yet the tracks will stay the same. Even if you reduce the penalty you get by following another car closely, most overtakes will still be confined to few parts on a track. You will still have a required delta for a successfull overtake. My guess is, if the cars are closer in performance, it will be more difficult to overtake.
If someone does "dominate" the championship for the first half of the year, he will slowly drop back in positions and as a result of that, be less likely to extend his lead. As a result, we will 'artificially' have multiple drivers be puddling around the same number of points, cancling each other out. Better position in this race will set you back one more the next one and so fort. The problem arises when factoring in that every track is different. To be in a certain position at race X could be a decisive advantage. Either way, it'll all end up in some lottery until the last race, when the best canditate for the championship will probably be the one starting somewhere in the middle.
This is not the essence of racing or motorsport. It also takes a way the shine of winning an event by being the best. And in the end, in favor for what? That people will be more excited about who might win the championship? If you create this kind of championship, you will devalue what it means to win it in the first place.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'd much rather see utter dominance and tip my hat to that driver and that team for being the best. To change it for this artificial spectacle is essentially dumbing down the sport and devaluing it on a grand scale. You'll risk losing the hardcore in favor of people who might tune in for a while until they see that there's no substance to it.
People become fans because they want to see the merit behind it and see the best win.
I would only quibble with the use of artificial. It wouldn’t be artificial it would be different. But it’s clear that people like to be able to evaluate a performance straightforwardly.
This approach is mirrored in society. Children who are good at exams are lauded over those that are good at course work, at least in the U.K. Employees who are good at crisis management are considered better value than those who manage things to avoid crises, at least in my experience. Athletes who are good at a single event are applauded over those that are good at the multi-discipline events.
You make a good case for the continuation of this trope in F1.
Your expectation that a major rule change will close the field up seems contrary to previous experience. I think we’re likely to see a very distinct winner in 2021 but of course that is pure speculation.