59 replies to this topic

[TheCaptain]

With Bernie talking of wanting to handicap Mercedes, I was having a think about if there could be a potential long term solution to the problem without being subject to political interference.

 

I came up with an idea - at some point (or points) during the year, teams have to make all (or a certain percentage of) their designs open and transparent, or let their cars be open to scrutiny from other teams.    Even if it's just at the end of the season.    

 

But in theory I see two advantages - teams won't have a locked in advantage for too long, and teams probably won't be so inclined to spend huge sums of money on small things that ultimately won't give them a long term benefit.    

 

Of course, the policing of this policy is where the issues, no doubt, would arise... could you trust the teams to submit accurate designs to the FIA?     And you'd be in danger of suddenly having a host of identikit cars on the grid.     

[PlatenGlass]

Put Damon Hill and David Coulthard/Jacques Villeneuve in the cars. It's worked in the past.

[George Costanza]

Put Damon Hill and David Coulthard/Jacques Villeneuve in the cars. It's worked in the past.

 

LOL.

 

I'd like to wonder how good Williams would have been if Alain stayed or Ayrton lived or Michael went there....

[MastaKink]

Open development,loosen aero regs and allow testing.

 

If it's too expensive go to GP2.

 

 

Too ignorantly simplistic?

[Massa]

I don't want to be harsh but.. It's a terrible idea.

 

Honestly, if one can't handle pure domination, don't watch F1.. Go watch specs series.

[RealRacing]

There's are threads for this called permutations of "how to improve F1" ...but as far as ideas go, it's up there with creating Michael Jordan clones.

[Jerem]

It's happened in the past and will happen again.

The solution is always the same.

 

Once the domination has lasted long enough, "enough" depending on how popular the winners are, change the regulations quite drastically, especially in the area where the dominant team is most dominant. It's only a problem if the dominant team has Newey, in that case you may have to apply this several years in a row.

[Wes350]

I don't want to be harsh but.. It's a terrible idea.

 

Honestly, if one can't handle pure domination, don't watch F1.. Go watch specs series.

 

This!

 

As a newcomer to F1 - everything I've read about the sport before watching my first season last year indicated that every 5-8 years a team will come along and run the table for about 2-3 years during a regulation change.

 

People are just getting upset that Redbull and Mercedes have done this back to back.... (and not Mclaren)

 

You want 'Close" racing. Watch a spec series!

 

You don't want a spec series?

 

Then you have to accept that the other engine makers stuffed it.

 

Want to help F1? More equitable payout. Engine cost cap to customers. Budget cap of 150mil. Intelligent regulation. And a simpler engine formula.

Edited by Wes350, 17 March 2015 - 01:26.

[Markn93]

I think the solution is to let this evolve naturally, that is, as the FIA have laid out over the next few years. People assumed the law of diminishing returns would mean Merc would be caught this year, but now they are even further along the development curve I expect at least one team to be somewhat close in a year or two. 

 

That's what people want isn't it? Not a spec series per se, but a competitive battle between a couple or three teams at the front. There is a distinction to be made there and fiddling with the regs to find a quick fix is not the solution. Perhaps when all settles down and the engines are frozen fully such that teams are hampered and can't catch up, then relax some regs, but for now a set of rules was laid out to play by, stick to them and soon (in the context of F1, not tomorrow as some seem to want) we'll see a good battle at the front. 

[Brother Fox]

Solution to dominant teams:

 

 

Weak teams get better.

[Wingcommander]

Every now and then there is a dominant team in F1 and that is very much part of the sport's nature. Watching other teams trying to catch up is part of the fun for me. I don't want parity, I want competition.

[William Hunt]

Easy solution: put Susie Wolff and Carmen Jorda in the Mercedes cars.
I think Jorda wouldn't even beat the Manor cars in a Mercedes tbh.

[PassWind]

Ok I agree with the people saying just deal with it, its sort of my view on dominance however there is one key element missing that was used in the past, teams could develop to catch up, in this case there is a window or quantity of opportunity and if you miss it, you can't do much about it during a season, where as with other years up to and including engine parity there was always a way to continue to develop the main performance differentiators. With this PU thingy mejig you get your hands tied behind your back at a certain point and even though you know how to fix it, you are not allowed too. 

[itsnoe30]

You can't punish the dominant team. It's not fair that they get punished for their hard work.

 

The only thing you can do is give the other teams an opportunity to catch up.

[Clrnc]

You can't punish the dominant team. It's not fair that they get punished for their hard work.

 

The only thing you can do is give the other teams an opportunity to catch up.

This. The suggestions to regulate engine power or slow the dominant teams is pretty ridiculous. It's definitely up to the rest to catch up.

 

What would greatly help is:

 

1) Give more freedom to engine and aero developments, especially the latter in current landscape to compensate for the lack of engine power for some teams,

2) More even distributions of prize money so that weak teams could catch up. 

[Baddoer]

Easy solution: put Susie Wolff and Carmen Jorda in the Mercedes cars.
I think Jorda wouldn't even beat the Manor cars in a Mercedes tbh.

How you can not beat car that always in the garage?

[Sash1]

I came up with an idea - at some point (or points) during the year, teams have to make all (or a certain percentage of) their designs open and transparent, or let their cars be open to scrutiny from other teams.  

 

That sounds good for amateur racing.

But I doubt Mercedes is ready to share combustion chamber specifications or the special stable shaft between the two turbo components with another commercial company like Ferrari or Renault, because it could benefit such organisations troughout their commercial activities (selling cars with economic strong engines in them). Opening up design, specially anything from the drivetrain and the software is something not even Renault would be willing to do. 

[Denaris]

F1 has always been about 1 team dominating for a number of years then another team taking over, this is how it is, it's not a recent phenomenon!

 

Audi has won Le mans 13 times in the last 15 years which eclipses any winning streak in F1 but no one is moaning about that.

[Denaris]

Or... Maybe Nico has the answer all along, I'm waiting for him to make good of his offer and invite Sebastian into the Mercedes debriefing room at the next GP. Maybe all teams could take turns to do this lol

[Peat]

The chickens are coming home to roost. 

They've tried to turn F1 into something it should never have been and now this 'entertainment franchise' is in trouble because one of it's teams is doing a far better job (albeit mainly down to outspending) than the rest. 

F1 needs to have a look at itself in the mirror. Is it a sporting contest or a circus show?

[Sash1]

The fun thing at Le Mans (and Endurance racing in general) is that at times, Audi was challenged by Peugot and now Toyota on pure speed but won sometimes purely on endurance and/or luck. There was competition. And this year should be particularly interesting.

[RedBaron]

What about a new slower tyre compound that the leaders have to put on in the race, but only if they are 30< seconds ahead of 3rd place and that time gap is no greater than the points gap between 1st to 5th in the WDC, but only if - when equalised - the tyre change wouldn't produce a lap time slow than 107% of the current average laptime during that race up until the end the of previously completed lap, not including laps with pit stops or incidents.

 

I just think F1 needs something like that that fans can understand just sitting at home watching casually.

[Sash1]

Edit: You know how effed up the rules really are that I only really feel the sarcasm of the previous tire post after one hour....

Edited by Sash1, 17 March 2015 - 12:30.

[Razoola]

The solution is in season testing. I would say the Mon,Tue,Wed after certain race weekends.

[Peat]

What's to say that Merc wouldn't just extend the gap?

[khatibrifath]

No matter what they do if they keep the same engine mercedes dominance will continue forever

[Cyanide]

What is this obsession with trying to stop dominant teams?

 

Their success is obtained through hard work, dedication and billions invested. How is it fair to try and take that away from them just because they've done a better job? 

[Geizterfahrer]

It's all about action on the track and not about dominance. Last season had some awesome racing between Hamilton and Rosberg and between Red Bull, Ferrari and Williams. I didn't like some details about the regulations, but the racing was great.

 

I don't think F1 needs that many changes on the technical side of things (maybe they should switch back to affordable engines instead of costly and overly complex 'power units') to stop the complaining. Some major adjustments to the race weekends should suffice to solve many problems of current F1. One point would be to get rid of the Qualifying. Simply start the race in reverse order of the WDC. No one will complain about a dominant team if the drivers have to get their race win from the back of the grid (Monaco will be a tad problematic though). Friday and Saturday could become proper testing days without any engine limit (otherwise teams wouldn't test to save engines for Sundays   ). GP2 and support series would have to run during F1 lunch times or after the test is finished.

 

They could make the second half of Saturday some kind of test driver and rookie shoot-out. The teams can give one seat to anyone who isn't one of their two regular drivers. The drivers have two or three hours of track time to hunt for fast lap times. Top 3 or top 5 drivers could get points for the super licence. Small teams can sell their seats to rich kids without compromising their drivers testing and the big teams can help their juniors to get points for their super license (for example, Mercedes could give Wehrlein the seat, because he can't get super license points in DTM).

 

It's that simple, seriously. Bernie would have his action and drama on Sundays, poor teams would have more cheap testing time (they're at the track anyways) instead of expensive wind tunnel time AND an extra income due to the possibility to sell their Saturday seat. Let the big teams spend as much money as they want. They'll have to win the race from the back of the grid, so it's their right to build a monster! 

[muramasa]

I loved Red Bull's dominance/superiority and I LOVE and am enjoying current Merc domination ALOT.

F1 has a lot of issues and can be better, tech should be freer, cost control etc, but dominance is just a proof/consequence of hard work. if you get punished for doing well, what is the point of dedication and commitment? How can anyone maintain motivation?

[Nonesuch]

if you get punished for doing well, what is the point of dedication and commitment? How can anyone maintain motivation?

 

I'm sure there are those who want to see Mercedes 'punished', or reigned in, but I think the main interest is in trying to prevent teams from becoming as dominant as Mercedes is this year. I think that boils down to both the technical regulations and the budget. Two things the FIA has failed to address to any meaningful degree in recent years, preferring to give up on their proposed budget cap and letting the teams and manufacturers do most of the work on writing the regulations.

 

Mercedes has done a fantastic job. There is no doubt about it, and there is currently no suggestion that they are cheating, or at least working from a Red Bull-esque interpretation of the regulations. Their success is well deserved, but also comes at a most inopportune time for F1 as a business and entertainment product.

Edited by Nonesuch, 17 March 2015 - 10:06.

[Massa]

 

but I think the main interest is in trying to prevent teams from becoming as dominant as Mercedes is this year.

 

 

Why ? Why a team can't be dominant like Mercedes this year, Ferrari in 2002 or 2004, Mclaren for the first two race of 98. Why ? They deserve it. That's the sport. When you try to prevent teams or whatever, it's no longer a sport but just politics.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Make the others work HARDER instead of MOANING...

[OO7]

The fun thing at Le Mans (and Endurance racing in general) is that at times, Audi was challenged by Peugot and now Toyota on pure speed but won sometimes purely on endurance and/or luck. There was competition. And this year should be particularly interesting.

There were periods of time where Audi went unchallenged though.

[AlexLangheck]

I don't want to be harsh but.. It's a terrible idea.

 

Honestly, if one can't handle pure domination, don't watch F1.. Go watch specs series.

 

Exactly!! It’s a World Championship, for goodness sake. Why can’t motorsport series handle domination? It’s not for the governing body to handicap the top guys/ teams. It’s okay in a national/club type series, e;g BTCC, DTM, etc But in a world series?? Absolutely no!! F1’s problem is because it’s become far too much about ‘The Show’ and entertaining the casual motorsport fan.

[Imateria]

Everybody else do better. End of story.

[Newbrray]

I can't believe some are actually suggesting to handicap the team that has done exceptionally well, it's one thing to say open up regs but to hinder a team so others can catchup, Maybe whilst we are it we should stop Goldman Sachs from trading for a few years so the Investment Bank of Greece can be more competitive or better yet let the Lib dems or UKIP have a crack at the prime minister job since Labour and Tory party have a competitive advantage

 

and this is the kind of formula you all want to sign up to 

 

shocking....absolutely shocking 

Edited by Newbrray, 17 March 2015 - 12:08.

[Turbo1]

Make the others work HARDER instead of MOANING...

 

You mean, Allow the others to work harder. Just let them test more!

[DampMongoose]

Just what F1 needs, more artificial tinkering.

 

F1 will turn into a modern school sports day where the kids that are crap at sport are all winners. 

[grandepreuve]

The ridiculous notion that stopping in-season testing would reduce costs is at fault. Teams will still spend their budgets on other aspects of R&D, and those that are particularly well supported in those other ways will benefit. Clearly Mercedes are better at those other methods of R&D than the opposition.

 

That development is frozen hasn't cut costs, it just means that a team that begins the season with a dominant position will tend to hold that dominant position for longer.

 

And...as for cost-cutting...what's the point in nibbling around the edges like this (stop in-season testing) and then introducing a new engine formula that could only ever be contemplated by a massive corporate manufacturer and costs huge sums to develop?

 

Just a typical round of those in charge of F1 showing how utterly stupid they often are.

[Nonesuch]

Why ? Why a team can't be dominant like Mercedes this year, Ferrari in 2002 or 2004, Mclaren for the first two race of 98. Why ? They deserve it. That's the sport.

 

Why? Perhaps the organisers facing half-empty grandstands and broadcasters not extending their contracts with FOM can explain why teams can't be dominant. Dominant teams are bad for business. It was no different in 2004, when Ecclestone and his associates were screaming from the rooftops about Ferrari.

 

Dominant teams are even more bad for business when regulations increasingly lock-in that dominance for not just one season, but for multiple years. Already after one Grand Prix it'll take quite a bit of searching to find even one person in the paddock who thinks the WDC will not be Hamilton or, less likely, Rosberg. It'll no doubt be even harder to find someone who dares claim Mercedes will not win the WCC.

 

All that might be bearable when the race is an awe inspiring spectacle, but for more and more people it simply isn't. Even the man who is arguably F1's greatest current driver is complaining that the cars are 'quite boring to drive', 'too heavy', 'too slow', and lacking that distinctive sound that many people enjoyed and associated with F1.

 

[Kristian]

A team should not be penalised for doing the best job. 

 

Or, at least, there should be a success rule for everyone - e.g. success ballast, rather than just saying "Mercedes shouldn't be allowed to develop until everyone catches up". But I don't believe in that solution personally.

 

However, there could possibly be a rule saying that customer teams must have same spec engines and access to same maps as the parent team - then at least if the likes of Williams or Lotus make a decent chassis, they have a chance... not sure how that could be policed though. 

[SUPRAF1]

Ok I agree with the people saying just deal with it, its sort of my view on dominance however there is one key element missing that was used in the past, teams could develop to catch up, in this case there is a window or quantity of opportunity and if you miss it, you can't do much about it during a season, where as with other years up to and including engine parity there was always a way to continue to develop the main performance differentiators. With this PU thingy mejig you get your hands tied behind your back at a certain point and even though you know how to fix it, you are not allowed too. 

 

I cannot believe the manufacturers agreed to the development freeze without seeing that inevitably this would be the result. I tutor middle-school kids and they would have recognized the potential problem. By definition, two of the three engine makers would have to catch up to the best one, and they'd be handicapping themselves with this rule. They made their bed and now they must lie in it. 

 

One solution that *might* work would be reversed grids or something. Remember the way F1 qualification system is set up, if everything goes according to plan, there should be ZERO overtakes or position changes because the cars are supposed to be ordered from fastest to slowest, and the only thing that allows deviation from this are randomizing elements like poor pit strategy, errors in qualy, rain, tire degredation, and race errors.

 

 

Regarding the lack of viewers, that's not really F1's job. Certainly FOM/FIA's dumb decisions don't help by pricing people out but ultimately the trend is only downward in motorsports for other reasons, but i won't derail the topic .

Edited by SUPRAF1, 17 March 2015 - 14:10.

[TheCaptain]

I think people are missing the point that I was trying to make.    I don't like the idea of handicapping any team as much as anyone else.    I don't want a spec series either.    But the only other solution we have is a change of regulations which always results in huge costs for all the teams, and then we end up exactly where we started but with a different team dominating.    I think it's fair that if a team has come up with a great technical solution they should be rewarded for it, even if it makes them 5 seconds a lap faster and the championship is a non event.     But for how long should that reward last?    One season?   Two seasons?    An arbitary number depending on how much it's lining Bernie's pockets?

 

Now the solution I've come up with is just a starting point and actually is trying to work at the root of the problem.    It doesn't handicap one team, but does allow others a chance to catch up a bit quicker.   And it's not just the leading team that would have to be open with designs - all teams would be.    Like I said, if [insert whatever level of transparancy was agreed to] was only made public at the end of the season, all teams are then free to pick and choose what they think the best concepts are and incorporate into the following years designs.    

 

Are there other more pressing issues in F1?   Yes - distribution of money is clearly the major one at the moment and without a fairer distribution anything else is just papering over the cracks.    However I think this is always an issue that's been around in the past, and the way F1 deals with it is always to try and handicap a team which is what I don't like and was trying to find an alternative too, without just rewriting the rule book arbitrarily.    I'd welcome any other suggestions that don't involve just throwing more money at improving and therefore sending costs spiraling.   

[David Lightman]

If there's 1 dominant team and 9 slower ones how about the 9 slower ones try and improve?

 

Just an idea.

[STRFerrari4Ever]

Don't try to slow Mercedes down or anyone else for that matter. Why punish a team for doing a better job than everyone else? Everyone else had the same regulations and Mercedes just happened to nail them better than anyone else, don't punish them for doing their job brilliantly. 

[AJFIN]

If there's 1 dominant team and 9 slower ones how about the 9 slower ones try and improve?

 

Just an idea.

 

How do you improve with all the restrictions in place today? It's not like Ferrari can pound hundreds of laps at Mugello and Fiorano between races like it's 1998. 

[Otaku]

F1 has always been about 1 team dominating for a number of years then another team taking over, this is how it is, it's not a recent phenomenon!

 

Audi has won Le mans 13 times in the last 15 years which eclipses any winning streak in F1 but no one is moaning about that.

 

Doesn't eclipse Ford or Goodyear 

[1Devil1]

How do you improve with all the restrictions in place today? It's not like Ferrari can pound hundreds of laps at Mugello and Fiorano between races like it's 1998. 

 

This. Yeah other teams should improve, but please don't damage your engine, don't waste money, don't use a real race track, or do anything - just wait and see. Mercedes shouldn't be handicapped, but Toto is just a funny guy, I also would laugh my ass off in his positions, guys work harder, it's like his last year comment about the financial revenue for smaller teams, spend money or get eaten alive 

[F1 Mike]

THE SOLUTION TO DOMINANT TEAMS IS TO HAVE REGULATIONS WHICH ALLOW OTHERS TO DEVELOP AND IMPROVE

[Atreiu]

Put Damon Hill and David Coulthard/Jacques Villeneuve in the cars. It's worked in the past.

 

 

Haha.