43 replies to this topic

[Guizotia]

There are various conversations going on in various threads at the moment, that regularly feature comments about "what is wrong" with F1. Rather than looking at the pros and cons of the current F1 formula, I thought it would be interesting to consider this again from a blank sheet of paper, but taking into account the realistic constraints.

So what is F1 ultimately supposed to be about?

I guess the most basic idea is "the best drivers driving the best machines". So let's imagine you can turn up to the track with the fastest machine you can build that can get around the track, and the best drivers you can hire. Let's call this Libertarian F1.

Let's assume the business model up-front as I think in any popular sport this is very similar and therefore probably unavoidable. Libertarian F1's business model is that companies pay to advertise on (or near) the cars racing in Libertarian F1. That produces some business model requirements:

1. It must be attractive to an audience as spectacle, this has three parts:
1a. The event must be competitive.
1b. The skill involved must be appreciatable by the audience - either through familiarity of operation of the machines or those machines have graspable important technical aspects.*
1c. The event must reward skill and effort. If driver A and driver B exert the same effort (and non-human aspects are equal), then the driver with the most skill should win (on average). If driver A and driver B have the same skill (and non-human aspects are equal), then the driver exerting the most effort should win (on average).
2. It must be acceptable to companies to be associated with.

The fundamental problem is, the above requirements contain contradictions that have to be balanced.

Safety - It is not currently considered OK to allow people to die while racing. Apart from it being politically incorrect to many audiences (who consider that employers have a responsibility to limit the dangers they're employees are exposed to) it also contradicts business model requirement 2, companies don't want their brand associated with someone dying. So rather than simply the best machines, we have to put rules in place to artificially constrain the allowed designs.

Cost - who do we expect to be entrants to Libertarian F1? Car companies have immediate advantage over privateers in that their participation is a form of advertisement for their products, so it pays in a way that it doesn't for privateers. Libertarian F1 would be dominated by the biggest spenders. Constraining costs means, again, having rules to artificially constrain the allowed designs.

Competitiveness - for ultimate competition the machines should have strengths and weaknesses that overall roughly balance out, leaving the driver skill and effort as the dominant factor. In spending-dominated Libertarian F1, that's only likely to happen some of the time. Sometimes there will be organisations more willing to spend than others and they will likely dominate for that period. The only way to prevent this are rules that artificially constrain the allowed designs so that the possible magnitude of domination is reduced.

So Libertarian F1, in the real world operation, is self-contradictory. It leads itself inevitably to artificial rules constraining what "best" means.

Any thoughts?

* For example, I can watch MotoGP even though I don't ride a motorbike because I can understand roughly what the riders are doing well or badly. I can watch car racing because I drive a car. But if you invented a machine who's control and internal technology I didn't understand, who's operation was unfamiliar, it would be difficult for me to enjoy the competition.

[Nobody]

Current F1 does not contain any elements from Article 1 of the Libertarian F1 model

 

Big problem

[Rocket73]

So what you are saying is that the natural evolution of F1 has become too complicated and dominated by business? I think that it has and that we have to accept that the golden days of a pure naturally evolving sport are gone.

We know too much technology and the corporations are too involved to make a safe (enough...people die in motorsport it's a fact), competitive and understandable formula that's left to its own devices.

This is why I have been pro cost cap for a while now. I feel it's the only way to dump a load of rules and bring true competitiveness back.

[Jimisgod]

1. Must be difficult to drive so the best drivers are apparent in any car.
2. Enough good drives must be available so that all drivers of exemplary talent get a chance in a potentially winning car.
3. Must foster technological innovation, although this should compliment the first 2 points rather than hinder them.
4. Must have a reasonable potential for a large variety of outcomes at any given race (no absolute domination).
5. Must showcase the most amazing tracks exant in the world. Not just concrete vanity projects by oil states.
6. Must involve the fans of all income levels, not just those who have pay TV subscriptions or are rich enough to buy their way into the paddock.

Of course, they're zero from six right now.

[V8 Fireworks]

I guess the most basic idea is "the best drivers driving the best machines"

 

Huh?  No it is NOT.

 

It is about grand prix open wheel racing - races for a grand prize, for cars built to a formula, specifically formula "one" as opposed to formula A or whatever.  Nothing more, nothing less.  It had become popular and well known, so good for it.

 

The best machines?  Hardly!? They were often slower and less sophisticated than two-seat closed wheel cars that raced in sportscar competitions 

 

The best drivers?  Well they are very good, but what makes them the best!??  The best? they are NOT.  They are simply a mixture of professional "guns" and wealthy amateur enthusiasts (or modern pay drivers!!)

 

 

 

 

 

 

See it's all the same thing !!  Grand prix racing - nothing more, nothing less... The scale of the operations may change, but it remains the same thing

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 17 June 2015 - 13:15.

[Donkey]

F1 is about trees.

[SealTheDiffuser]

wasn't it about daredevilness acompanied with engineeerical madness. plus chest king konging.

[Nonesuch]

It is about grand prix open wheel racing - races for a grand prize, for cars built to a formula, specifically formula "one" as opposed to formula A or whatever.  Nothing more, nothing less.

 

While true, that formula has always been drawn up based on certain views of the racing series that would result from it.

 

Over time the desire of participants and their commercial partners to gain and maintain the interest of a large global audience has had an influence on the formula.

[V8 Fireworks]

Over time the desire of participants and their commercial partners to gain and maintain the interest of a large global audience has had an influence on the formula.

 

Only in recent decade have the rules become so complicated and contrived, that the rules detract from the simplicity of a competition of constructor, driver and machine itself.    The rules ought to facilitate that simple competion that the spectators come to see, not to define it totally, yet the latter is the case.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 17 June 2015 - 13:25.

[brr]

F1 is about being the series which is worse than every other racing series, and which people swear they will never watch again but do so anyway.

[Beamer]

Huh? No it is NOT.

It is about grand prix open wheel racing - races for a grand prize, for cars built to a formula, specifically formula "one" as opposed to formula A or whatever. Nothing more, nothing less. It had become popular and well known, so good for it.

The best machines? Hardly!? They were often slower and less sophisticated than two-seat closed wheel cars that raced in sportscar competitions

The best drivers? Well they are very good, but what makes them the best!?? The best? they are NOT. They are simply a mixture of professional "guns" and wealthy amateur enthusiasts (or modern pay drivers!!)

https://www.youtube....h?v=vf5GMkzNl7w

https://www.youtube....h?v=6moHQl7xhRs

https://www.youtube....h?v=upCpajm1IFc

https://www.youtube....h?v=9vd5UzxFXBo

https://www.youtube....h?v=kfhEilKC70Q

See it's all the same thing !! Grand prix racing - nothing more, nothing less... The scale of the operations may change, but it remains the same thing

The opening pister didnt say what it was, but what it should be. In his point of view. So what should it be in your point of view?

[V8 Fireworks]

The opening pister didnt say what it was, but what it should be. In his point of view. So what should it be in your point of view?

 

I don't care TBH; I would rather a regional professional open-wheel racing series here in South-East Asia and Oceania (Australia and NZ).

 

No use for my caring too much, when there is no race here in Adelaide.    Something like Indycar would be plenty good enough; it's similar enough to F1 but far more focussed on being fan-friendly, far more relaxed and far more accessible. 

 

Anyhow, I think it should F1 / WDC for grand prix racing should be defined by upholding the traditions of what came before.  (certainly bring back the winner's wreath for one thing!)

[SealTheDiffuser]

wasn't it about daredevilness acompanied with engineeerical madness. plus chest king konging.

 

the SAS/SBS of motorracing

[CurbPainter]

F1 should be about the best drivers in the World being able to distinguish themselves and show their skills.

 

It's not that interesting to see every two weeks which car is still the best given a certain formula...that becomes boring after just 5 minutes.

[Atreiu]

Incredibly fast cars (plus the implied danger) which only uniquely talented drivers can entirely dominate and the priviledges of jet setting around the world to meet the adoration of fans.

 

---

 

edit: technology, money and the rest are all incidental. And, to be honest, nowdays we have nothing but the jet setting around the world.

Edited by Atreiu, 18 June 2015 - 14:31.

[Razoola]

In my view its a simple problem with F1. I cringe every time I hear a voice from within the sport say 'we need to improve the show'. Every time a step is taken in that direction a piece of F1 is lost... It is not a show. People do not watch because it is a show. People will never understand F1 if its a show. F1 is a sport, what is needed is people from within f1 saying 'we need to improve the sport'.

[Beamer]

Who was it that said something like "Only 10 drivers in the world should be able to really master an F1 car, the rest of the grid is merely able to survive driving one," and to extend on that "and the rest of the world will die trying to drive one"  

 

That sounds just about right ;) 

 

I do like the technical side of F1, the outwitting and out-thinking other engineers, but most of all I would like F1  to be really, really difficult to drive on the edge. I'd rather sacrifice some tech in order to have "the fastest cars around a track that need incredible balls, car control and skill to drive". The excitement and 'show' will follow from that. 

[V8 Fireworks]

F1 should be about the best drivers in the World

 

It has got absolutely nothing to do with them being the best drivers in the world.

 

There are far too many kinds of driving, and so many closed doors to F1, so many different aspirations of young drivers, to leap to such a radical conclusion.

 

 

There are too many examples of other kinds of driving to list them all

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 17 June 2015 - 14:30.

[CurbPainter]

It has got absolutely nothing to do with them being the best drivers in the world.

 

There are far too many kinds of driving, and so many closed doors to F1, so many different aspirations of young drivers, to leap to such a radical conclusion.

 

 

There are too many examples of other kinds of driving to list them all

 

I'm not talking about 60/70% of the F1 field, but about the others and about circuit driving.

 

The top of the circuit drivers are still in F1...the group which follows closely behind that is actually way too large to be all in F1.

[ViMaMo]

Difficult cars that can be only driven well by the best? How can you a driver get credits for that without fans going on about how the car doesn't suit his style?

Also should it be about driving around most difficult tracks with great safety standards, that is a drivers' delight.... that may not produce overtakings. There are so many ways to make a track a challenge.

Also F1 should allow cars to race during rain more often.

[Frank Tuesday]

In my opinion, F1 should be a motorsport embodiment of the principles of the pure sport of racing.  Start line, finish line, first one to finish is the winner, the rest are losers.  There should be no space in the sport for gimmicks to improve the show.  When considering a potential new regulation, the first question should be, "Does this rule adhere to the principles of fair sporting practices?"  Does it treat all participants equally (or as equal as is realistically possible) at all times?   

[V8 Fireworks]

Does it treat all participants equally (or as equal as is realistically possible) at all times?   

 

 Like how Ferrari get $150m just for turning up, and Caterham get $0. 

[Rob]

It started off as a racing series for whatever racing cars they happened to have left after the war.

[ch103]

I think the definition of what F1 should be about changes with the times. Initially it was about being the fastest to race from town to town.

In modern times, its about being a profit center, sadly.

[LuckyStrike1]

Good racing and sports entertainment? 

[Jerem]

F1 should be about fast cars driven fast by fast drivers racing as hard as they can.

It's about slow cars driven slowly by airplane pilots avoiding racing as much as they can.

[turssi]

It's the leading open wheel series with the fastest, sexiest and most over the top races.

At the moment they could be faster, have more beautiful ppl and the vip area could have less fat rich ppl.

[Frank Tuesday]

 Like how Ferrari get $150m just for turning up, and Caterham get $0. 

One of many examples, sadly. 

[HeadFirst]

For me, F1 should be about the best sprint racers competing for the WDC, on paved road or street courses. I understand the love some have for the necessary elements leading to the WCC, but for me the WDC always comes first. If it were possible to develop closer competition among the teams I would prefer NOT to go to a spec series, however I see that as an impossibility under the current funding format.

[MikeV1987]

 Like how Ferrari get $150m just for turning up, and Caterham get $0. 

 

To be fair, how much money, time and effort has Ferrari poured into F1 in the past 60+ years compared to Caterham?

[JoyDiv]

Current F1 does not contain any elements from Article 1 of the Libertarian F1 model

 

Big problem

 

Period.

 

I think it's impossible to solve that Article 1 in the next few years

[Rocket73]

For me, F1 should be about the best sprint racers competing for the WDC, on paved road or street courses.

If Le Mans cars can go flat out for 24 hrs it does seem ludicrous that F1 cars are such a massive case of system management. I used to argue that F1 has always had an element of management in it, usually the consumables like tyres, brakes and fuel etc but surely the WEC is showing us that with modern tech this is no longer the case.

You're right, F1 should be a sprint from start to finish.

[jjcale]

I like the concept of libertarian f1 ..... by which you really mean minarchist/anarcho-capitalist F1 .... that this concept which built F1 has been regulated out of existence and folks want a return to "the golden age" but without risks - financial or physical - says what is wrong with much of the world today.... too many mediocre minds who dont realise that they are just living off legacies created in an earlier time when men were more free to be creative yet who think that the solution is yet more rules to constrain what little creativity there is left.  

 

Its not just F1 that's F---ked.... 

[Radoye]

I would like to put forward a different proposal - an Open Source F1.

 

A most basic set of regulations governing the dimensions of the car, engine power output and driver safety. This may change at the discretion of the governing body to address safety and other concerns.

 

All manufacturers / constructors / teams (m / c / t's) are free to develop their equipment as they wish when they wish how much they wish within the set regulations.

 

All m / c / t's are obliged to submit all their equipment for homologation before they can legally enter it into a race. To have it homologated, all blueprints and data have to be made public. Furthermore, the m / c / t will have to agree to sell their homologated equipment to any interested party at a fixed price determined by the governing body (an engine / PU for this amount, a rolling chassis for that amount, a front wing for such, etc). Failing to do so means the particular part will not be homologated and will not be allowed to be used in the race.

 

All m / c / t's are allowed to buy parts from other manufacturers / constructors / teams or to build their own using other's blueprints submitted at homologation; all m / c / t's who build their own are also obliged to sell them to other m / c / t's if there is interest. All m / c / t's are allowed to modify other m / c / t's designs or come up with their own, all subject to homologation rules.

 

So basically pretty much everyone has full access to everyone else's IP and is allowed to purchase, copy and modify freely. There is a cost cap set for the prices m / c / t's can sell their parts. To be able to use a part on your racecar you have to agree to offer it to everybody else.

[scheivlak]

If Le Mans cars can go flat out for 24 hrs it does seem ludicrous that F1 cars are such a massive case of system management. I used to argue that F1 has always had an element of management in it, usually the consumables like tyres, brakes and fuel etc but surely the WEC is showing us that with modern tech this is no longer the case.
 

WEC is an even more massive case of system management 

 

One can say that F1 is looking more and more like WEC. Whoever says that WEC is just flat out racing doesn't follow WEC very well.

[BlackCat]

in the beginning F1 was about balls. natural fear of death was the main slowing-down factor and the question was: do you dare to go faster than those other guys

since Schumacher F1 has been about neck muscles, there are all kinds of artifical slowing-down devices and the question is: can your team change wheels faster than other guys

[chipmcdonald]

F1 should be about the best drivers in the World being able to distinguish themselves and show their skills.

 

It's not that interesting to see every two weeks which car is still the best given a certain formula...that becomes boring after just 5 minutes.

 

 

 I agree with this, but the "reasonable" response of the FIA/FOM to that would be "ok, we'll just make the fast cars slower by doing something goofy".

[chipmcdonald]

To be fair, how much money, time and effort has Ferrari poured into F1 in the past 60+ years compared to Caterham?

 

 Is that not their choice?  You get prizes for spending more money?

 

 How does this not create a retrograde system when there is no way for a new team to realistically compete or stay afloat?

[Rocket73]

WEC is an even more massive case of system management 

 

One can say that F1 is looking more and more like WEC. Whoever says that WEC is just flat out racing doesn't follow WEC very well.

 

Ok well in that case the commentators on eurosport don't follow WEC very well..

[phoenix101]

In my view its a simple problem with F1. I cringe every time I hear a voice from within the sport say 'we need to improve the show'. Every time a step is taken in that direction a piece of F1 is lost... It is not a show. People do not watch because it is a show. People will never understand F1 if its a show. F1 is a sport, what is needed is people from within f1 saying 'we need to improve the sport'.

 

When has competition and sport not been entertaining?

 

Yes, it is sad when they kill the sport and competition, then they add cheap kitsch to make people watch, but trying to make it entertaining isn't the problem. If they make a competitive sport everyone will watch. Sports competition = entertainment. Always. To cringe at the sound of entertainment proposals is to be afraid of your own shadow.

[Astro]

I would like to put forward a different proposal - an Open Source F1.

 

A most basic set of regulations governing the dimensions of the car, engine power output and driver safety. This may change at the discretion of the governing body to address safety and other concerns.

 

All manufacturers / constructors / teams (m / c / t's) are free to develop their equipment as they wish when they wish how much they wish within the set regulations.

 

All m / c / t's are obliged to submit all their equipment for homologation before they can legally enter it into a race. To have it homologated, all blueprints and data have to be made public. Furthermore, the m / c / t will have to agree to sell their homologated equipment to any interested party at a fixed price determined by the governing body (an engine / PU for this amount, a rolling chassis for that amount, a front wing for such, etc). Failing to do so means the particular part will not be homologated and will not be allowed to be used in the race.

 

All m / c / t's are allowed to buy parts from other manufacturers / constructors / teams or to build their own using other's blueprints submitted at homologation; all m / c / t's who build their own are also obliged to sell them to other m / c / t's if there is interest. All m / c / t's are allowed to modify other m / c / t's designs or come up with their own, all subject to homologation rules.

 

So basically pretty much everyone has full access to everyone else's IP and is allowed to purchase, copy and modify freely. There is a cost cap set for the prices m / c / t's can sell their parts. To be able to use a part on your racecar you have to agree to offer it to everybody else.

 

Not sure about this. As an example, a team could take the Mercedes as a whole. It would be a bit pointless to compete in terms of technology when you can just hold your money and wait to see who comes up with the best design. In the end, you would have something quite similar to customer cars, except all but one manufacturer may abandon the competition. In which case, a spec series would be a faster way to get there.

 

A cost cap followed, if possible, by a massive simplification of the tools available to the driver and technology constrains would not lead F1 to a spec series and it may do away with unsustainable tools like wind tunnels or expensive engines. Most teams would probably rely on car manufacturers to provide them with engines. To make the competition fairer, the open source rule should be about non exclusivity, so all the players had access to the same gadgets, whether they are engines, tires, brakes, engine oil, etc.

 

With a cost cap, the profit distribution should not be equal. Those who came with the best design are rewarded the biggest prizes, thus becoming a motivating factor to participate in the competition. Also, the prize wouldn't become an unfair advantage and it would help successful teams to continue the following year. That way, you would have a selective process where the best stay and the mediocre leave. If you distributed the profits equally among all, then you would have mediocre teams able to stay forever despite being potentially better teams wanting to participate as well.

 

F1 should design a set of fair and simple rules and then go from there. Any other policy that do not address the most fundamental problem with this competition will only be gilding the lily.

[phoenix101]

Libertarian F1 is called Formula Libre. It can't really exist. Just like a true free market cannot exist because forces will immediately start coercing and perverting open markets. Similarly, Formula Libre will kill lots of people with toxic materials and cars that pull enough g's to kill a man, not to mention vaporize fans in the event of an accident. Perhaps insurance could alleviate these risks, but the sport would not really be functional.

 

Competition is the secret sauce that makes everything work. It makes markets work, and it makes sport work. Competition forces teams to spend money on R&D, which spurs innovation. Competition makes fans watch. Dynamic competitive environment makes employees move around, as well. If you don't have competition, you have to create it, with anti-trust rules, anti-monopoly rules, draft lotteries, salary caps, or whatever. Unfortunately, egalitarian spec racing doesn't create competition, it creates the joke known as NASCAR, which is really just a beer guzzling reality TV show.

 

Making the sport competitive is what F1 fans can't wrap their heads around. The FIA can't break up the teams and cancel employment deals. Also, the teams don't age, unlike human athletes, which means laissez-faire doesn't really work in motorsport. Therefore, the FIA should be making all kinds of changes between seasons to make the sport more competitive. For instance, they should be adjusting annual fuel allotment to each team based upon championship finishing position. The good teams must innovate with less fuel. The bad teams are pushed to the front, and then they are also forced to innovate. Meanwhile, competitive racing keeps the fans involved.

 

"Oh it's sooo fake". No, it's how the foundation of modern society was built. Now get with the program.

Edited by phoenix101, 19 June 2015 - 11:24.

[Afterburner]

The fastest, toughest open-wheelers, the most challenging tracks, and the best drivers.

Until as recently as 2005 or so, we had all three. I think it was Lauda who said we needed to undo every rule change of the last ten years? Look where that puts us.

[Rocket73]

Phoenix101...who are you working for? We have ways of making you talk you know ;)