62 replies to this topic

[SirDennis]

The obvious? solution to the top teams dominating with three car teams is to make them run two cars with three available to (under todays circumstances) the bottom seven. No points for third car/ driver .... perfect way of giving new upcoming or even old (Kubica) drivers a second chance....

[Nigol]

Idea sounds interesting at first, but then you think of a top 9 consisting of 3 Mercedes/3 Ferraris/3 Red Bulls. And a uniform podium. 

[Spillage]

This would just kill the smaller teams. The solution is to give everyone enough money to compete or introduce a budget cap to level the playing field. Customer cars would reduce the field to four manufacturers. And if one of them suddenly pulled out we'd be in big trouble.

[Kalmake]

Did you guys read the OP before posting?

[SirDennis]

Im suggesting thetop three are only allowed two cars folks.....!

[goldenboy]

Can the bottom 7 all afford to run a 3rd car?

[NixxxoN]

Idea sounds good on paper but that could be exploited in evil ways I'm afraid... for example the third car of the top team just blocking other teams cars of trying to get good results or challenging the 1st car of that team, for example...

Edited by NixxxoN, 25 September 2018 - 10:45.

[FirstnameLastname]

Can the bottom 7 all afford to run a 3rd car?

If the top 3/5 have to pay into a fund for it? Could be a way for them to give their driver academy drivers a chance in the sport at a different team maybe?

Maybe rather than making those 7 cars ‘ghost cars’ that can’t score points, the driver finishes lowest in each of those teams has their race result deleted. So all 3 cars have an equal shot at getting points

[Hati]

We should go to one car teams but since that isn't financially possible we'll have to settle for two car teams. And find solutions that increase competitiveness of those teams, no artificial gimmicks.

[goldenboy]

If the top 3/5 have to pay into a fund for it? Could be a way for them to give their driver academy drivers a chance in the sport at a different team maybe?

Maybe rather than making those 7 cars ‘ghost cars’ that can’t score points, the driver finishes lowest in each of those teams has their race result deleted. So all 3 cars have an equal shot at getting points

The funding part sounds complicated and not my cup of tea but the points part I agree with. I think that's what happened when Honda had 3 bikes a few years back.

[SirDennis]

The top three teams can help fund the third car from the bottom seven teams for their upcoming drivers....
If guest drivers are allowed eg Loeb, Rossi etc they could be allowed testing (which might enable the bottom teams to close the gap to the top although extra testing with a new driver would probably have limited development benefits

[pitlanepalpatine]

I'll just repost what I put in the remedies thread:

 

 

Since people keep wanting third cars for rookies but are concerned about them locking out the podium they could try:

 

Rookie Cup: If 5 or more constructors submit an entry a rookie cup will be held.

 

Each constructor will provide 1 additional driver that has not previously  completed 2 or 1 seasons in F1.

 

Results could be organised as follows to prevent podium lockouts by 1 team

 

1. Participants for the Rookie Cup are not eligible for WDC or WCC positions. 

 

Or

 

2. Only the leading 2 cars for any participating team can be eligible for WDC or WCC positions. The remaining car is excluded.

 

[SenorSjon]

If they make a new points system up until 15th-20th what they are planning now, I don't really mind 3 (or 1)-car teams to be honest. No point scoring positions would be lost then.

[pdac]

Either have teams properly funded by equal distribution of the prize fund, regardless of classification (my preference) or else just have 3 teams with 8 cars each.

 

Edit ... or just allow 1 car in each team to score points (both championships)

Edited by pdac, 25 September 2018 - 12:33.

[alframsey]

No thanks.

[Retrofly]

Sounds like a farce.

[athlon]

What was the rule when Repsol Honda were running Pedrosa, Dovizioso and Stoner?

[Dennista]

3 car teams with sprint race qualifying and reverse order for a race with minimal set up changes allowed. That should stir the pot.

Edited by Dennista, 25 September 2018 - 14:26.

[SenorSjon]

What was the rule when Repsol Honda were running Pedrosa, Dovizioso and Stoner?

 

Sign here. :+

 

Dorna would make up any rule in Repsol cases.

[kumo7]

For Three car team.

 

Treat the third car like Andretti says, a Guest car with no points.

Edited by kumo7, 25 September 2018 - 14:37.

[FirstnameLastname]

For Three car team.

Treat the third car like Andretti says, a Guest car with no points.

That’s just a ghost car though and utterly pointless.

The rule would/should be that the 3rd placed car in each team on any given weekend is the non-scorer.

[lustigson]

Third cars can score no WCC points, and must run at a lower fuel flow limit. 

[Cornholio]

The only way I could see myself being even slightly okay with it would be as part of a much more flexible entry list in general, i.e. one-car teams allowed (as they were up until 1991), no hard cap on entry numbers, partial campaigns also allowed. Kind of like IndyCar is currently I guess.

 

Even then it has its problems though, and as it is, with no other changes, it would be almost certainly the first step to seven or eight 3-car teams, then six 4-car teams, etc. Because then there'd be less motivation to keep Force India alive, or for Haas to enter, etc. for the sake of keeping the grid numbers somewhat respectable, as there currently is.

[Sterzo]

I vote for no restrictions on numbers for any team, and no "fudges" like allowing cars but not giving them points. Keep it pure.

 

Before someone says (again) it would just mean the top teams locking out more places, that's because of the farcical distribution of revenues. The first rule of problem solving is: identify the problem and solve that. Don't do something else (e.g. restrict numbers of cars per team). That tendency to solve the wrong problem is what's given us DRS, joke tyres, and unaffordable engines.

[Neno]

No. 

[SirDennis]

What do you mean joke tyres?,
.... surely lapping at only 12seconds off the pace as Hamilton did in Singapore makes for rivetting viewing!!

ps thats slower in the dry than a decent wet time....

[Dr. Austin]

I'de rather add two car privateer teams running customer cars.

[SirDennis]

Only if these are not top three teams though....

[Massa_f1]

I would like three car teams purely so we can get more than 2 drivers able to challenge for the championship.

it would hopefully create more open seasons like 2010 and 2012 which have been badly missed in recent years in my opinion.

[pRy]

There are a number of issues. I'm not sure Monaco has the space for three car teams. And the moment you allow Mercedes, Ferrari and Redbull to run three cars you effectively lock out the top 9. The smaller teams are never going to agree to that scenario. 

 

I think the only real solution is the good old fashioned traditional one.... more teams.

[Atreiu]

3rd cars for the bottom teams would most likely mean two pay drivers and one racer. Or one pay driver, one racer and one Mercedes/Ferrari/Red Bull refugee who's there as part of an engine or technical partnership. Neither option is exciting or would actually solve F1's current obsession with keeping veterans for as long as humanly possible. Of course more cars are always fun, but even then Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull would win it all and the group of teams and drivers fighting over scraps would just get bigger.

 

pRy is right, more teams would be better.

 

The only way to achieve that is to tear the rulebook and start from scratch with something a lot more accessible.

[loki]

Can the bottom 7 all afford to run a 3rd car?

Most of them can barely afford two cars.  The extra engine lease alone would be taxing for most of them.

[Yamamoto]

What was the rule when Repsol Honda were running Pedrosa, Dovizioso and Stoner?

 

I think it was perfectly valid within the rules. If I recall correctly the reason teams didn't was practical rather than anything else. 

[kumo7]

To allow to add the third car as guest cars is a good idea, so far.

Only ten teams get paid, so no team can survive the shark pool with no cash in from FOM.
To get two more teams in, I say it should need the teams accept less money from FOM in order for all teams to get basic funds or Liberty to increase the income via Internet.

I thought Formula1 is a big guys game for big money. The FOM would not want a team to be on the grid to just pay to be there.

I mean not all team, at all races, must run the third cars, just allow them.
If necessary make them pay to do so, that which shall be distributed to all teams and FOM

Edited by kumo7, 25 September 2018 - 21:52.

[ThadGreen]

There are a number of issues. I'm not sure Monaco has the space for three car teams. And the moment you allow Mercedes, Ferrari and Redbull to run three cars you effectively lock out the top 9. The smaller teams are never going to agree to that scenario. 
 
I think the only real solution is the good old fashioned traditional one.... more teams.

I think you may have something there (see bolded) of course the benefit of the op's proposal is that Monaco get eliminated from the calendar?

[kumo7]

The track was going to be longer, there was a discussion about it this year ...

[cheekybru]

Read the thread please guys no one is suggesting giving Merc or Ferrari or Redbull another car, just the rest

[RacingGreen]

I'm in favor of more cars NOT more of the same cars.

 

We need a better distribution of F1's money so we get more teams and smaller works/factory/manufacturer teams enforced via an employee head count limit to even the field. We also need to regulate for simplified aero, so each $1 spent has a less impact, and simplified PU's manufacturers don't get to dictate their customers performance levels.

 

So no 3 car teams isn't the way to go. 

[kumo7]

I'm in favor of more cars NOT more of the same cars.

We need a better distribution of F1's money so we get more teams and smaller works/factory/manufacturer teams enforced via an employee head count limit to even the field. We also need to regulate for simplified aero, so each $1 spent has a less impact, and simplified PU's manufacturers don't get to dictate their customers performance levels.

So no 3 car teams isn't the way to go.

Next to budget cap might be good

[Ellios]

OP asks good question, much respect but we all know

 

 

 

[kumo7]

I got this notion that this thread just now has tuned into a new thread with the theme evolved from the discussion: two more teams as the solution for the budget cap and solution for unemployment: driver, designer and all the stuffs.

Edited by kumo7, 26 September 2018 - 00:13.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

3 car teams with sprint race qualifying and reverse order for a race with minimal set up changes allowed. That should stir the pot.

Until the top teams get enough data to feed there simulators...

[Wes350]

NO.

[huggybear]

Read the thread please guys no one is suggesting giving Merc or Ferrari or Redbull another car, just the rest

 

4th best team Force India only just survived a few months back. None of the small teams can really afford to run two car teams without a pay driver or two. Where are they gonna find the extra 20-30m a year to run a third car?

[Jbleroi]

terrible idea,  the third car although not getting any championship points is still a very usefull wingman. 

[Zoe]

Problem with a third car, that is not eligible for points, is, that teams may opt to use it as a rear gunner (or second wing man) to the lead car.

[SenorSjon]

Problem with a third car, that is not eligible for points, is, that teams may opt to use it as a rear gunner (or second wing man) to the lead car.

 

That is why I said 1-3 car teams allowed and perhaps you should have a points system up until 20 or so to have every car able to score points. Works in WEC, Blancpain, IndyCar, Nascar and the like. Also grant more liveries between teammates to have more sponsorship on cars.

[sopa]

Other series use guest appearances or wild cards to boost the grids. However, the disparity between machineries in F1 is so big that most teams would object if a third car was entered by a top team, because he would most likely end up ahead of most of them. Backmarker teams don't have the money to field a 3rd car. A wild-card entry in other series usually ends up being an underdog or a backmarker unless he is some kind of a local track specialist, or gets a bit lucky.

[THEWALL]

Three more cars that are potentially able to fight for wins. What’s wrong with that? You’d just have to make sure that they are truly allowed to race each other, so not in the Toto definition of the term...

[apreading]

What about 3 car teams up to the end of qualifying, then teams that ran a third have to nominate which two go forward into the race?

 

So rookies could do most of the weekend up to but not including the race, more testing miles, great opportunity to advertise how good the rookies are and the return of a real 'reserve' driver role for teams?

Edited by apreading, 26 September 2018 - 14:26.