BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 Sorry Tamuff but a race is a race no matter what part of the season it is held in and a championship is a whole championship. It is completely unfair and stupid to give double points at the end, as if that race is somehow more important or significant than the others that went before. Thankfully it appears as though this suggestion has been absolutely ripped to shreds everywhere online and there's no way the FIA will have been able to miss the reaction of fans. When you consider that they're only doing this in order to keep the fans interested, they'll see that it has backfired massively and I would now be surprised if they don't backtrack on it, such is the level of idiocy and misjudgement they've demonstrated. Having said that, it doesn't surprise me that there's "always one" who will defend something like this or at least not be against it. DRS taught me that. It goes beyond facepalm though. It makes me want to punch my own face 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 In a nod towards common sense, F1 teams have 'overwhelmingly' rejected the mandatory pitstop proposal because it would 'damage the racing'. Thank **** for that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) But what do you really think I know what you are saying, I am not saying it was a fantastic idea. Just could see the thinking behind it especially with seasons like this one where teams just give up development about 25% of the way through the year as its clear they cannot compete. The little nugget at the end might have served as a bit of a reason to stay in the game and also give a bit of last day excitement. As you have said though, 99% of people think its a bloody terrible idea and the remaining 1% think it is just a little bit silly so it'll probably get binned. The FIA are getting a bit of a reputation of going back on their ideas. The season that has just ended was comfortably the worst I've watched in following the sport for about 20 years. Even the year Brawn GP romped it the others had closed the gap by the end of the season. I can see why they are thinking outside of the box for next year. Might have just been a step too far Edited December 10, 2013 by Tamuff_Villa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 Oh I can see the thinking behind it alright. I just think it's the wrong solution to the problem. Ultimately they're trying to solve an issue around dominance - trying to keep the title race alive. But you tend to get dominance when there has been rule stability for so long, as one team perfects that particular generation of car. The solution? Have fundamental rule changes (like the ones for 2014) more regularly in the sport to shake it all up. Yes you might end up with the same team winning, because cream rises to the top, but at least you add the variable and the distinct possibility that someone will do a Brawn or that some of the better funded rivals can steal a march (no pun intended). Basically the FIA have gone towards the 'easy option' more regularly in recent years and it makes a rod for their back because while they take the easy option without actually fixing the root cause, you end up with a formula that is riddled with issues and riddled with easy solutions to those issues and in the end as I said, you've got a sport that's rotten to its core and which becomes far more difficult to actually fix than it would have been at the start. I think they need to start taking the difficult (and the right...) option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 Another way to make dominance more difficult to attain is to make the regulations less restrictive. Allow teams the freedom to use ingenuity; to find loopholes or developments that may not be obvious to others. But all too often, something is developed and immediately banned by the FIA. The teams' hands are tied to a ridiculous (and a growing) degree these days and I know it almost meant losing Adrian Newey a few years back because he was getting to the opinion that they were having to 'design'(sic) identikit cars. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 fully agree with all your points there BOF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 they should go back to having to run to your car at the start of the race then, incrementally, every year they could add something to that initial dash, crawl under a large sheet, wriggle through a ladder, or up and over with a hoop etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 I like it. However ... *pedant alert F1 drivers never ran to their cars. You're thinking Le Mans. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 10, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted December 10, 2013 How about, they have to build their cars first. Like the Krypton Factor. In fact, **** F1, just bring back the Krypton factor. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Another way to make dominance more difficult to attain is to make the regulations less restrictive. Allow teams the freedom to use ingenuity; to find loopholes or developments that may not be obvious to others. But all too often, something is developed and immediately banned by the FIA. The teams' hands are tied to a ridiculous (and a growing) degree these days and I know it almost meant losing Adrian Newey a few years back because he was getting to the opinion that they were having to 'design'(sic) identikit cars. You want Lotus to run with a 6 wheeler next year, don't you? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 You want Lotus to run with a 6 wheeler next year, don't you? Hehe, maybe And a diesel Ferrari. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) I made a mistake. It was Tyrell with the original 6 wheeler...always thought it was Lotus. Edited December 10, 2013 by AVFC_Hitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 Sshh! It's still a valid wish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Whilst we're on the idea of this...here are some great innovations that were poor and/or banned immediately. Banned after one race. Brabham. This Ensign was a poor design, only qualifying for 4 of the 11 races it entered. 2001 Arrows. It's just awful. Banned for aesthetic reasons. 'Walrus nose' design on a 2004 Williams. Replaced after 12 races. After failing to stop Schumi winning 12 of the first 13 races of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 The Brabham was dangerous to the car behind. Some developments had even more serious consequences. Honda killed Jo Schlesser in 1968 with an experimental F1 car. So a leash does have to be kept on teams, without a doubt. I think we've gone well beyond what is required though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Formula 1 was a different beast in 1968. The drivers would drink a bottle of whiskey, and shag the pit girls before exploding into a fire ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 10, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) The Brabham was dangerous to the car behind. Some developments had even more serious consequences. Honda killed Jo Schlesser in 1968 with an experimental F1 car. So a leash does have to be kept on teams, without a doubt. I think we've gone well beyond what is required though. There was a great documentary on a while back on BBC (I would guess you've seen it BOF, given that I seem to remember you sharing my morbid fascination of F1 accidents) about safety in F1, or rather the lack of it back in the day. Unfortunately I can't recall the name. The way they used to just experiment on race days was frightening. No testing, not even much thought. Just a designer or engineer out on a whim might think "Oh this might work", literally the morning of the race, and they'd just bolt something to a car and hope it worked Edited December 10, 2013 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffGreens Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Unfortunately I can't recall the name. Grand Prix: The Killing Years (link) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 10, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted December 10, 2013 That's the one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 10, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2013 Possibly this Stevo. It was on BBC4 a while back called 'The Killing Years'. EDIT : Slow Draw McGraw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts