The Formula 1 Thread - 2014
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,579
Likes: 1
From: sideways with an OWL!
The problem with banning in season development, is that you'd need sufficient pre-season testing. And if you came up with a stinker, you're screwed the whole season. Look at the double diffuser season, Brawn dominating until everyone else caught on. They still won, but it would have been a lot less interesting if in season development had been banned.
Why is ballast such a dirty word in F1?
Why is ballast such a dirty word in F1?
Former Moderator
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,771
Likes: 311
From: Stanmore
What Philip said. New rules tend to shake things up for a while, but then typically by half way through the season the teams have got on top of them. Next year is a pretty big change though, bigger than has been seen for a long long time, and in particular the clever exhaust systems are gone and that's where Newey was so good and Vettel so good at being able to extract the best from them (unlike Webber obviously). So I think it's too early to say. Plus, those engines are going to fail a lot more, which at least means it's not likely one driver is going to win all the time.
I think the double points thing will go away. It's probably going to be universally panned by drivers, fans and journalists alike, and then we'll see the FIA backtrack. I wonder how much this is Jean Todt; he's been a pretty low key FIA president, certainly compared to Max Mosely, but now he's been re-elected maybe he's flexing his muscles.
Rule stability helps the smaller teams catch up, because the big teams have much more resources to throw at a rule change. Potentially a cost cap could change that, if it turns out to be meaningful.
I wonder if what they should do is ban all in season development. So the car you have at the first race is the car you race all year. That would massively cut costs, as well as cancelling out this idea of giving up on the current year and focusing on the next. But arguably that's not really Formula 1.
I think the double points thing will go away. It's probably going to be universally panned by drivers, fans and journalists alike, and then we'll see the FIA backtrack. I wonder how much this is Jean Todt; he's been a pretty low key FIA president, certainly compared to Max Mosely, but now he's been re-elected maybe he's flexing his muscles.
Rule stability helps the smaller teams catch up, because the big teams have much more resources to throw at a rule change. Potentially a cost cap could change that, if it turns out to be meaningful.
I wonder if what they should do is ban all in season development. So the car you have at the first race is the car you race all year. That would massively cut costs, as well as cancelling out this idea of giving up on the current year and focusing on the next. But arguably that's not really Formula 1.
Vettel has already condemned the double points for the last race thing as "nonsense".
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
The problem with banning in season development, is that you'd need sufficient pre-season testing. And if you came up with a stinker, you're screwed the whole season. Look at the double diffuser season, Brawn dominating until everyone else caught on. They still won, but it would have been a lot less interesting if in season development had been banned.
Why is ballast such a dirty word in F1?
Why is ballast such a dirty word in F1?
Total in season development may not work fairly. But how about the same rules for wings, chassis and floors as the engine and gearbox?
Make then use them for 5 races with penalty for changes.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,579
Likes: 1
From: sideways with an OWL!
Limited changes might work. But it's still a bit of a lottery, you'd need in-season testing.
Or maybe it might not be so bad when they all finally get their wind-tunnel and CFD setups working correctly.
Or maybe it might not be so bad when they all finally get their wind-tunnel and CFD setups working correctly.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 801
Likes: 1
From: Southern Indiana
I also need to pick a new favorite driver considering mine (wisely) jumped to Porsche!!!
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 12,330
Likes: 0
From: Frustration
I was a Webber fan too 
Still, Vettel has condemned the double points because he has at least an ounce of common sense.
By all means, give the race double points and make it at least 3 hours long - I can understand that.
But giving it double points just because of it's chronological order is bloody stupid and everyone barring the FIA knows this.
And here is why:
Marussia get a 9th place and a 10th place next year. Last race of the season Caterham get a 9th place, go to 4 points and beat them.
How on earth is that anything other than an injustice and a farce?
Still, Vettel has condemned the double points because he has at least an ounce of common sense.
By all means, give the race double points and make it at least 3 hours long - I can understand that.
But giving it double points just because of it's chronological order is bloody stupid and everyone barring the FIA knows this.
And here is why:
Marussia get a 9th place and a 10th place next year. Last race of the season Caterham get a 9th place, go to 4 points and beat them.
How on earth is that anything other than an injustice and a farce?
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,112
Likes: 2
From: Banbury, Oxfordshire
He's not dead ;-) You can still be a Webber fan for WEC and LeMans.
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/139167.html
The whole point of having different tracks is to give the drivers and teams different challenges. By doing double points, anyone who just happens to be good at Abu Dhabi will get a bigger advantage over someone who is stronger at another circuit. And a DNF at that one race will be worth two DNFs everywhere else. Crazy rule. It'll never happen.
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/139167.html
The whole point of having different tracks is to give the drivers and teams different challenges. By doing double points, anyone who just happens to be good at Abu Dhabi will get a bigger advantage over someone who is stronger at another circuit. And a DNF at that one race will be worth two DNFs everywhere else. Crazy rule. It'll never happen.
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 18,456
Likes: 5
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 813
Likes: 0