Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Will sanity return to F1?


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 36,090 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 20 December 2013 - 15:15

Luca Montezemolo have invited or will invite all teams to a meeting at Maranello late January.

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/111923

It appear from his comments he will suggest a number of changes, which will not be the artificial knee jerk changes the FIA have concocted the past 10 years. The part about 3rd cars supplied to other teams, which have been a Ferrari pet-project I can agree to the second the franchise is opened to any and all teams who want to and will commit to a full season of F1.

Hopefully all teams will show, and hopefully all teams will approach this as a chance to get the sport back on the right track, and actually improve the show without compromising on their competitive abilities between the

 

:cool:



Advertisement

#2 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,173 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 20 December 2013 - 15:22

I'm not sure how sensible their proposals will be, considering they voted for this double-points stupidity in the first place.

Sanity will return to F1 when we get people who actually love racing back in charge.

#3 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 20 December 2013 - 15:30

Sanity won't return, neither will the financial situation as the global economy falls apart.

 

Towards 2020 manufacturers, if there are any still in F1, will look at LMP as a safer, more stable placard for their marque.  The teams will never come to a consensus without an outside mediator setting the parameters for them.  

 

I hope I'm wrong.



#4 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 23,879 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 20 December 2013 - 15:32

These are the same folks who wanted Pirelli to make show tyres and spent years stumbling over themselves attempting to come up with a decent qualifying format.  I wouldn't hold out too much hope that they will have any bright ideas.



#5 UPRC

UPRC
  • Member

  • 4,716 posts
  • Joined: February 99

Posted 20 December 2013 - 15:52

No. We're too far down this weird road of DRS, KERS, double points, screwy tyre ideas year in and out, and Bernie proposing stupid ideas like medals and shortcuts to turn back now.


Edited by UPRC, 20 December 2013 - 15:53.


#6 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,823 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 20 December 2013 - 16:16

The question implies that there was sanity in F1 at some time in the past. Bearing in mind the last three Presidents of the FIA, that's a pretty dubious contention!



#7 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 36,090 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 20 December 2013 - 16:30

Sanity may be a strong word, and other places I have voiced my biased and very personal views on which way to go. Views which are very much clouded in the rose tinted glasses of yesteryear and fact that I have been following F1 since 1972. I want the Franchise of fixed number of teams broken, I want anyone and everyone who wishes to field a team being able to, if they want to do so in a car Purchased from Caterham, Ferrari or Dallara they should be allowed to do so. I want no budget cap, and I want no engine limitations / design locks. I want all the 'spec' of all Single Seater series to be abolished and let true competition reign.

 

I am certain that rules can in fact be written in a manner so spending a Billion will not automatically give you a WDC and WCC, that having a mere hundred million will still make you somewhat competitive and all teams should be able to battle for places 8 through 10.

 

Those are aims the meeting should work towards.

 

:cool:



#8 P.Dron

P.Dron
  • Member

  • 374 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 20 December 2013 - 16:32

As Chico Marx said, "Everybody knows there ain't no Sanity Clause."



#9 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 12,548 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 20 December 2013 - 16:42

The teams are the ones who have came up with most of the rule changes in recent years. I imagine their ideas will consist of banana skins and more power to be concentrated to the top teams.



#10 milestone 11

milestone 11
  • Member

  • 17,340 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 20 December 2013 - 16:53

Sanity may be a strong word, and other places I have voiced my biased and very personal views on which way to go. Views which are very much clouded in the rose tinted glasses of yesteryear...

:cool:

These same views need to be addressing GTM.   ;)



#11 DampMongoose

DampMongoose
  • Member

  • 2,258 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 20 December 2013 - 17:02

So F1 has been through a few stages of drivers sitting in flimsy mobile petrol tanks on skinny tyres, ground effects that caused blurred vision and aero that suggests they could drive upside down to name a few.  All of this having taken place on circuits that had barbed wire fences and telegraph poles, flammable straw bales lining the track, roll up and trap yourself inside catch fencing to the latest stay in the lines car park stuff we have now in front of a crowd dwarfed by the number of marshalls.  Notable mentions along for the ride going to the Life F1 team for their participation, with a car they had to cut the chassis and weld back up again to change engines, an FIA run by one of the News of the Worlds favourite headline grabbers and circuits running races at a financial loss with no reduction in costs by those in control. 

 

Sanity? No mate, nobody hear by that name... try next door.



#12 R Soul

R Soul
  • Member

  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 20 December 2013 - 17:17

One necessary change would be to remove the requirement for any rule change to have the unanimous approval of all the teams. But they'd have to get the unanimous approval of all the teams to change that rule.



#13 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 20 December 2013 - 18:30

You already know the answer - it actually gets progressively worse.;)

 

Actually they will implement a four-race chase with double points for the last 4 GP's that was allegedely initially proposed. "Sanity prevails," declare team bosses. "It makes much more sense to keep the championship as open as possible as long as possible. Not only will the 2nd to 4th last races get double points, but the very last GP gets triple points!"



#14 chunder27

chunder27
  • Member

  • 5,775 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 20 December 2013 - 18:52

Sanity from Montezemelo??

 

You must be kidding, the bloke is as power crazed and self absorbed as any other team boss!

 

If it doesnt benefit Ferrari in some way and most of F1 does, then I doubt he will be singing loudly!



#15 drionita

drionita
  • Member

  • 221 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 20 December 2013 - 18:57

There's a little thing to explain what has happened and what will ever happen.

Entropy.

 

---

Matt

Southern Italy



#16 demet06

demet06
  • Member

  • 126 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 20 December 2013 - 19:00

Would Luca Montezemolo be making these proposals if Ferrari had been in Red Bulls shoes this year? I very much doubt it.

​Everyone knows that F1 can't continue in the manner that they've been doing over the years but who's going to stop it? The teams all act in their own self interests, not necessarily for the good of the sport. Ferrari itself proved that by negotiating its own deal with Bernie, thereby getting more money than any other team but not disclosing it. 

Too much of the money generated by the sport, leaves the sport. More of the money pot should go to the teams and the circuits rather than dubious companies attached to the sport. The majority of the money should be shared equally among the teams, with accepted prize money for the successful teams/drivers. A transparent spending cap should be brought in where teams can inspect each others books. 

It'll never work though as teams will still overspend one way or another.



#17 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 36,090 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 20 December 2013 - 19:17

Would Luca Montezemolo be making these proposals if Ferrari had been in Red Bulls shoes this year? I very much doubt it.

​Everyone knows that F1 can't continue in the manner that they've been doing over the years but who's going to stop it? The teams all act in their own self interests, not necessarily for the good of the sport. Ferrari itself proved that by negotiating its own deal with Bernie, thereby getting more money than any other team but not disclosing it. 

Too much of the money generated by the sport, leaves the sport. More of the money pot should go to the teams and the circuits rather than dubious companies attached to the sport. The majority of the money should be shared equally among the teams, with accepted prize money for the successful teams/drivers. A transparent spending cap should be brought in where teams can inspect each others books. 

It'll never work though as teams will still overspend one way or another.

 

Think I agree with most of this, except the part about Montezemolo not saying this, if Ferrari were red Bull. We had Newey complaining about the sterile and uninteresting series being enforced more and more. I do not think we will get a lot of agreement from the teams. I also think that the teams are their own worst enemies. And I think the teams and the FIA needs to have a sitdown, discuss the ill's and woes of F1, followed by a meeting with CVS and have CVS willingly give up a huge chunk of the money they are bleeding from the sport.

 

There is little reason for CVS to do so, I am fully aware that I am naive voice in this, but staying with this model for the next 80 years or what ever it is, can not be considered tenable and even if by now pretty old someone should take this through a court system and get it terminated, if CVS will not give something back.

 

:cool:



#18 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 20 December 2013 - 19:24

Does not "sanity" in this context really mean "an anachronistic formula"?

Formula E is moving forward. LMP is going about it's business.

Formula 1 seems to be trying to appease everyone at the expense of it's soul.

IC engines are an anachronism. Loud race cars, non-computer assisted driving - an anachronism. I'd suggest that is the root of what really everyone wants, is it not? At some point you have to pull back and go "just because things are moving in this direction, doesn't mean F1 should".

#19 metz

metz
  • Member

  • 15,857 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 20 December 2013 - 19:38

Sanity from Montezemelo??

 

You must be kidding, the bloke is as power crazed and self absorbed as any other team boss!

 

If it doesnt benefit Ferrari in some way and most of F1 does, then I doubt he will be singing loudly!

Exactly.

If he didn't like it and was opposed to it, he could have used his veto power.

He did not.

I'm aware of his hollow excuse (didn't want to pressure the other teams), as he clearly states it was only Bernie that wanted it.



Advertisement

#20 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 20 December 2013 - 19:48

I don't understand why Ferrari of all the teams would be the ones pushing so hard to make customer cars a thing. It would only dilute their brand.

 

If they just want more competitive Ferrari engined cars on the grid they can throw Sauber some more money.



#21 billm99uk

billm99uk
  • Member

  • 6,385 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 20 December 2013 - 22:58

I suspect if what some people in this thread define as sanity returns, we'll be looking at nineteen Vettel victories next year instead of thirteen  :p 



#22 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 20 December 2013 - 23:31

LdM like the other power players are the encumbent custodians of a deep heritage.  He may be on his own agenda but right now if he can persuade the dropping of the double points madness, I'll take it.  He's a bit mad but he cares about image, and he gets listened to.



#23 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 20 December 2013 - 23:49

The first thing that needs to happen is for F1 to be owned by the teams.



#24 Reinmuster

Reinmuster
  • Member

  • 969 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 21 December 2013 - 02:44

The first thing that needs to happen is for F1 to be owned by the teams.

 

Another attempt to form a breakaway series? No. The last time it was unsuccessful, thanks to Ferrari.



#25 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 1,384 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 21 December 2013 - 03:11

Another attempt to form a breakaway series? No. The last time it was unsuccessful, thanks to Ferrari.

I don't think it would ever work. Teams will always put their interest ahead of greater good. I definitely can't see big teams agreeing to big changes like budget cap for example unless there are other authorities there to impose it. Without someone impartial in a situation of protecting everyone's interests, everyone would be out for themselves, which is not a good thing.



#26 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 12,548 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 21 December 2013 - 11:29

The first thing that needs to happen is for F1 to be owned by the teams.


Only if you want to ruin it completely.

Edited by Fastcake, 21 December 2013 - 11:30.


#27 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 32,908 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 21 December 2013 - 12:40

I think the main problem is that over the last 10 years, the technological side of F1 has been totally flipped on its head.

 

In the past, it used to be that technologies, being developed for racing cars were applied to road cars.  It is now the opposite with F1 taking on board road car technologies in some sort of green appeasement  This to me is a load of crap.  This is a racing series, not a showcase of green technologies.

 

And don't even get me started on DRS.



#28 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 21 December 2013 - 13:16

"The pond is shrinking. The fish are nervous", is the famous line by Gus Haynes in TV-series The Wire used to describe the state of the newspaper business and the behaviour of certain journalists in such uncertain times.

 

F1 has problems, too. They might be solvable, but the stories about pay-drivers at teams from the back to the front of the grid, teams not paying their drivers, teams going years without proper windtunnels, cuts in testing, no competition in engines for years, one tyre manufacturer, more standardized components, etc. aren't all just coincidences.

 

I don't understand why Ferrari of all the teams would be the ones pushing so hard to make customer cars a thing. It would only dilute their brand.

 

Why do you think Ferrari is pushing 'to make customer cars a thing'? The Autosport article merely mentions it as one of the hot topic in recent F1 news, and something Di Montezemolo wants to talk about. From all Ferrari has said in the past, their position seems to favour three-car teams. I don't see any examples of a change in this stance. :confused:


Edited by Nonesuch, 21 December 2013 - 13:16.


#29 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 36,090 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 21 December 2013 - 13:52

F1 lived without issues for many years as a class where manufacturers could sell their cars to teams wanting them. They key to me is that F1 was not a closed franchise then. F1 should be owned by FIA, not by the teams and most assuredly not held hostage by an investment fund for the foreseeable future. The breakaway can not happen, all races would have to be on tracks who broke with FIA as well, either teams and FIA figure this one out, or the sport will continue sliding as it has been for quite some time.

 

:cool:



#30 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 1,892 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 21 December 2013 - 15:04

I think the main problem is that over the last 10 years, the technological side of F1 has been totally flipped on its head.

 

In the past, it used to be that technologies, being developed for racing cars were applied to road cars.  It is now the opposite with F1 taking on board road car technologies in some sort of green appeasement  This to me is a load of crap.  This is a racing series, not a showcase of green technologies.

 

And don't even get me started on DRS.

Yes, yes, yes. I've been saying this for some time. Chipmacdonald said it, too. There was a time when you wanted your road car to be like a race car Now the FIA want race cars to be like road cars. This is the wrong approach. As for the Ferrari Summit idea, well, it's a good start but I fear there are too many vested interests to allow them to get too far.



#31 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,713 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 21 December 2013 - 18:05

1. Motorsport, especially the ICE, is in inevitable decline because it's just not new anymore. The ICE is unsustainable, pretty much fully developed, and has only a decade or 2 to live. ERS is a good decision because the future will be electric.

 

2. The insanity is not an F1 thing, it's a global economic/political thing. You can't fix it in isolation.



#32 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 22 December 2013 - 00:27

It's philosophy. F1 represented pushing limits.

Within the hodge-podge of rules there is "F1" still.

I'm all for electric motors being in F1. It's the 21st century, and that's the future.

33 seconds a lap? Where did that come from? Limiting the output?

That is not F1.

Managing fuel: I'm for that as well.

BUT....

With a homologated 6 cylinder? If the fuel flow and amount is going to be spec - and we're trying to either push the limit, OR push economy technology forward - wouldn't it be more "F1" to just say "figure out the best way to use that energy that you can"?  Weight limits?  Rev limits?  What if a turbine would be more efficient?  If that is the case, what is the logic in inventing "green" rules when you're not actually pursuing the most "green" result?



#33 sheepgobba

sheepgobba
  • Member

  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 22 December 2013 - 08:11

Honestly I dislike the new rules F1 is introducing next year. Le Mans seems more interesting currently with new manufacturers and the unique freedom provided to teams in regards to engine displacement and innovative solutions they are able to come up with. F1 should be about the pinnacle of Motorsport and not rules such as the V6 engines, fuel flow rate and the 5 engines per season. The cars and rules are just 'meh' currently and it's only the beginning. Seriously don't like the way this new formula and the current formula we have had. It has just turned the sport into a bleak area for me. 

 

So no, sanity won't be returning to Formula 1 for a while, especially until we get someone who isn't Todt. 



#34 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 7,844 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 22 December 2013 - 10:26

F1 lived without issues for many years as a class where manufacturers could sell their cars to teams wanting them. They key to me is that F1 was not a closed franchise then. F1 should be owned by FIA, not by the teams and most assuredly not held hostage by an investment fund for the foreseeable future. The breakaway can not happen, all races would have to be on tracks who broke with FIA as well, either teams and FIA figure this one out, or the sport will continue sliding as it has been for quite some time.

 

:cool:

 

This. People, FIA and Todt are not the problem. The problem is that the rule regulating body does not have financial controll over the sport they try to regulate. That was fine for years, Ecclestone did a fine job, but somewhere around the line the working system became a closed shop where newcomers don't really have a chance.The existing parties - including Ferrari! - have allowed the system to develop indeed into a closed franchise. 

 

It has said many times before, but if Lotus would have won the world championship this year, they still would have gotten less price money than Red Bull and Ferrari. If Luca really wants to sanitize F1 he could start with this idea: division of the tv-money amongst ALL teams. And teams that have won Grand Prixs or WC's you can give a bonus.