Montezemolo still banging on about third cars

[flynfrog]

I wonder how many would be all over the idea if it was Mad Max's

I say let the teams bring all the cars they want to race. If they qualify let them in. Same with limiting the number of teams why not limit grid positions. If a team can get a car in so be it. Back in the good days of Indy they would spend two weeks to qualy the cars. This would allow teams with a limited budget to slap together a car run a few grand prix and hope to get a sponsor.

[WhiteBlue]

Third cars by the rich teams is another fundamentally unfair way to gain an advantage. The private teams would never go for that. Williams would fight it to his death and even Bernie would oppose it although he usually only cares for the money.

Nobody wants third cars but Ferrari and they will never get it. This shows just how incredibly dumb and single minded they are. As if their competitors would give them the tools to dominate them. The sooner Ferrari gets rid of the loony bin called Montezemolo the better.

[flynfrog]

thanks for stating the obvious. I don't think any of us already knew that.

This just in water found to be wet

[andrew]

I wonder how many would be all over the idea if it was Mad Max's

I thought that but I was not brave enough to be the first to put my head above that particular parapet.

[andartop]

I think Ferrari should concentrate on running one car to the end of each race to begin with.

If all goes well, they must try to ensure both cars finish all races.

That goal achieved, they can work their assess off to getting both these cars back to winning races.

Get a title.

Get both titles, as in the good old days of Schumi, Brawn, Todt and co.

THEN Luca can start thinking about running a third car!

[donskar]

Is there a rule about two race cars being mandatory? Or can a team run a single car?

That would be cool, just like a few decades ago where there would be single car entries from privateers.

Agree with the idea of one-car teams -- easier (AND CHEAPER) to put one reasonably competitive car on the grid than two. Don't let your hatred of Ferrari blind you to facts: once upon a time -- while many of us were alive -- one-car privateer teams competed successfully with the big, bad manufacturers. (Rob Walker, with Jo Siffert driving. And some guy named Frank Williams started with one car -- a de Tomaso methinks)

Three (and -- heaven forbid -- more) car teams are also an idea not unknown to F1. It happened in the past -- and the Earth continued to revolve about its axis.

[donskar]

I think Ferrari should concentrate on running one car to the end of each race to begin with.

If all goes well, they must try to ensure both cars finish all races.

That goal achieved, they can work their assess off to getting both these cars back to winning races.

Get a title.

Get both titles, as in the good old days of Schumi, Brawn, Todt and co.

THEN Luca can start thinking about running a third car!

Yeah, it's been so long since Ferrari won a race. Err. . . wait a minute. . .

[andartop]

Yeah, it's been so long since Ferrari won a race. Err. . . wait a minute. . .

Well, Bahrain is starting to fade away in memory, isn't it? I haven't seen any of the two cars fighting for wins since, and the last one before that was in Spa 09...which was the only victory for Ferrari the whole season. You'd have to go back to 2008 to find both Ferrari cars regularly fighting for wins.

So, yes, in view of that, I would have thought they need to concentrate more on their current two cars rather than worry about running a third one.

I wouldn't mind teams running as many cars as they want, but I'd rather see Ferrari running a single car and winning races rather than have three and struggle to get on the podium...

[WhiteBlue]

We have the next installment of Luca's manipulative exercises. Only this time we get a sensible comment contra from Mike Gascoyne.

I think leeway should be given to new teams. From Lotus's position, in Q1 in Monaco we were 2.3s off the quickest lap time and there's plenty of teams in years gone by who got nowhere near that and people didn't whinge.

For me, Monaco really showed what a lot of hot air all that stuff was. There weren't any problems. The only problems, in fact, were in Q3 when there were only 10 of them out there and they all held each other up. A lot of the people doing the complaining should have spent less time whingeing and more time looking in their mirrors! I don't think there's any problem. We need to encourage new teams in the sport and I don't think we should have rules that penalise them.

I don't think he (Montezemolo) is right. I think the response to Lotus coming back has been great and it's universally accepted that it's been good for the sport.

I'm 100% with Lotus on that.

[vall]

Luca is right. In Monaco the new teams were slower then the GP2 teams, no? I am all for 26 car grid, but the new teams shoudl have been given more time to prepare and possibly test more before joining the grid

[WhiteBlue]

Does the comparison of F1 and GP2 in Monaco really matter? Monaco is a unique circuit where engine power and sophisticated aerodynamics take a back seat to driver quality. So we should not really be surprised that there are overlaps between F1 and GP2.

[andrew]

It's a valid point comparing F1 cars to GP2 cars. An F1 car should be faster than a GP2 car at all circuits.

I like the 3rd car idea. What I think should happen is that smaller teams car "hire" a car from a bigger team (say McLaren, or Ferrari) and race it as one of their own. This will benefit the smaller team as they are more likely to finish higher up in the constructors and get a larger share of Bernie's cash come the end of the season. It benefits everyone as the supplier gets an extra sourve of revenue, the smaller team gets a fair chance to shine and attract investment and the fans will get to see some mixed up grids which would hopefully give some surprise results.

[WhiteBlue]

What I think should happen is that smaller teams car "hire" a car from a bigger team (say McLaren, or Ferrari) and race it as one of their own. This will benefit the smaller team as they are more likely to finish higher up in the constructors and get a larger share of Bernie's cash come the end of the season. It benefits everyone as the supplier gets an extra sourve of revenue, the smaller team gets a fair chance to shine and attract investment and the fans will get to see some mixed up grids which would hopefully give some surprise results.

I'm afraid it isn't as simple as that. Please follow the line of argument that was already made in 2007 when the FiA last tried to introduce customer cars in the interregnum of the lapsed concord agreement against some independents like Williams.

According to... the Sporting Regulations, constructors were only able to score Constructors' World Championship points with "both cars". This meant that the constructors could only enter two cars in the World Championship but could supply additional chassis to customers - if those customers did not mind not scoring points.

That, of course, is a ludicrous situation because a team's ability to raise money is based on the ability to score points in the Constructors' World Championship and the only value of such a situation would be for the bigger teams to own four cars and use two in a strategic manner to deprive rivals of points. The problem with that is that idea is that if one big team does it, all the big teams would be forced follow suit and then half the field would not be eligible for points but would still be playing a role in the race and one can imagine the whole thing descending into a demolition derby with expendable cars and cars that need to be protected.

The FiA made a power play with the planned Prodrive entry and lost in a legal game of chicken to Williams. Williams threatened too take the Fia to civil courts for violations of competition and business practises. This was with the prospect of no concord agreement in place for 2008. Now we have a new concord since July 2009 and customer cars would in effect violate pages full of contractual obligations the parties have agreed to.

[timbo]

Make customers cars not earn points for CC.
Dead simple.

[WhiteBlue]

Make customers cars not earn points for CC.
Dead simple.

Read the argument from GP.com.