TBK-Light.com

I'd like to make a remark about the ad panels behind Nico in the bottom picture, but I won't.

I was about to write some of my thoughts, but then I read noikeee's view and thought that it has pretty much all that needs to be done.

Except for two things. Firstly - MOAR POWER! The cars needs to have a lot of power and limited amount of grip to make them a handful to drive. Great drivers would really stand out, just like they used to (Senna with Toleman and Lotus for example).


Secondly, with control tyre manufacturer, force them to make a monsoon tyre! No more safety car or red flag bullshit when there's a mild shower! If I can drive a 1991 Ford Sierra with shoddy winter tyres in a blizzard with visibility of no more than 20 meters for a straight hour, a pack of twenty worlds most talented drivers should be able to keep their multi-million dollar race cars on the track at the World's most safest race tracks when there's a small shower! They've done it in far worse conditions at Fuji 1976, Portugal 1986, Donington 1993, Suzuka 1994, Spa 1998 and Interlagos 2003 than what we've witnessed lately with seemingly endless safety car and red flag periods. Suzuka 2010 qualifying was the worst for me. I woke up after 6 hours of sleep. For what? To watch two hours of rain! No matter how you put it, that is just bullshitting the audience who in the end bring all the money and interest to the sports. And unfortunately this has become a new standard. And it's killing the sport as much as stupid penalties, DRS and engine restrictions combined.

What I want F1 to be? The showcase of best technology and best drivers going around the World to battle it out, I don't want to wake up on my Sunday mornings just to see millionaires standing in the garages in front of their monitors, watching how the rain is pouring down on the track that the marshals are swiping with their brooms. Hell, if I want to see brooms and swiping, I'd be watching curling and cursing how bad it is when a motorsports event is ruining my curling show!

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

I'm not even sure how I'd bring about my changes but what F1 needs to be truly exciting again is this

MORE VARIABLES

I would like a tyre war between at least 3 different manufacturers. I'd like to see many different engine suppliers, some running light frugal engines and others running heavier more powerful units (maybe only those with KERS to make up for the weight)
I'd like some teams to run topside aerodynamics, others to experiment with ground effect.
I'd like some cars to be really good under acceleration (giving them a big advantage at the start) but compromising the outright top speed.
I'd like some teams to have to run the race really frugally and others run flat out full rich the entire time.
I want some cars to be a lot quicker in the corners but sluggish in a straight line and vice versa.

If someone can write up some regulations that covers all of this then I'll be a happy man.

_________________
RIP Birmingham Wheels: here's some of the crash videos I recorded when it was there:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIaKIE ... 5t9d5PvoHA

Twitter:

http://www.twitter.com/paulhadsley

you can't just tease us, what is it? Is it about the "special olympics"?

@codename, 3 or more tyre manufactures war would be great, imo too, but I can't see any company willing to take up to the 2 giants Michelin and Bridgestone. We would need to have the likes of Goodyear(and this one would trash the others) versus Pirelli, Hankook, Continental. Maybe, if you take GY out of the play and just let the other 3, then we could be in for a very interesting battle.

and in that case "most 'flamboyant' driver in the grid"

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: everything is a bad taste joke now

"Most fabulous driver on the grid".

surely Sutil would be disqualified for bitchslapping nico

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: everything is a bad taste joke now

Never forget the former most faboulous couple of F1.

Well that's looking through blood-tinted glass(es)...

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

I'm frightened at the number of calls for different tyre manufacturers. Wouldn't that mean losing control over how much mechanical grip you want the F1 cars to have in general, therefore leading to higher cornering speeds, less sliding around, and ultimately less on-track action?

I also believe any lenience on car design and/or added power, despite pleasing the hardcore driving fans and driver talent when alone on track, would hurt the ability of the pack to be as bunched up as we saw in the Pirelli years.

Car must fit into box X x Y x Z and pass current FIA crash testing.

You get X amount of fuel for the race, refueling is banned.

Any tire compound (from the approved tire manufacturer) may be used during the race. There are no mandatory tire changes.

All races are 320KM (200 Miles) in length.

Figure a schedule of 20 races, best 18 finishes count towards the WDC and WCC.

Minimum cars per team is 1, max is 3, there is no limit number of teams, race grid is set to 28 cars. Pre-qualifying takes place on Friday afternoon after a 1 hour morning practice session regardless of car count. All cars within 107% of the fast time set in the morning practice are admitted to qualifying on Saturday where the fastest 28 cars will be determined using the current knock-out formula.

I have trouble really getting into F1 because none of the drivers seem even remotely likable to me. They all seem to be such prissy snobs. Maybe they aren't, but the way they are presented to me (an American with limited TV coverage) does not really show the good sides (if they have them) of their personalities. Making the drivers more fan friendly and likable seems like a logical way to gain more fans.

The point with having more tyre manufacturers is that it would be a pretty significant variable. The way it's worked in the past is that usually one manufacturer has the best slick/dry tyre, and one (not necessarily the same one) has the best wet tyre, so you have different situations where working with a manufacturer could be beneficial or a problem

It wouldn't always be to the benefit of the racing, but at it's best it can create far more dramatic racing than with a control tyre. 1997 was fantastic because the Bridgestone slicks were much better than Goodyear's and yet the teams running them were generally those not expected to do well - Prost, Arrows and Stewart in particular - so you ended up with bizarre situations like Hill nearly winning in Hungary

Plus you've also got the Goodyear/Pirelli period of the late 80s/early 90s (Phoenix 1990 being a good example - a Minardi on the front row and a Tyrrell nearly winning) and the Bridgestone/Michelin era, particularly 2006 when Michelin had the best wets but it often varied in races - in China, in the wet Michelin had a clear advantage but then they hit a point where the Bridgestones were suddenly better and Schumacher clawed Alonso in very quickly. At the time, I didn't think it was fair that certain teams were handicapped by their tyres, but after 7 years of control tyres, I'd rather it be exciting and "unfair" (which it isn't really - the teams choose their tyres, for better or worse) than fair and predictable

Restrictions work both ways - they ensure everything will be close because everyone's running the same thing (be it tyres, engines or aero), but they also make it difficult to gain an advantage or make progress. The engine freeze is a good example of this - it saved a lot of money and largely stopped one engine being dominant, but the rev limit has hurt overtaking and they ended up being incredibly reliable. Similarly, when all the circuits share the same characteristics, it becomes easy to build a car to those - back in the 1990s, there was a lot greater variety so it was very difficult to a build a car that could be fast everywhere

So we've ended up with a situation where Red Bull having a few tenths per lap over the rest of the field has become a huge advantage (akin to a second a lap or more in the 1990s) because it's very difficult for the other teams to make that up - when you're left with only one or two variables to play with, you have to do those one or two things better than Red Bull to win, and at the moment that's impossible because Adrian Newey is the master of aero. That's why F1 needs to open up something again, be it tyres, engines or circuits

All that is true. But the problem is that excitement coming from reliability and uncertainty over the different venues isn't as good as excitement coming from a close field IMO. Despite Vettel's domination I much prefer the last seasons' pack racing to the late 1990s' exciting championships, full of boring races.

this.

plus returning to the old 2000mm width.

If I had to mention all the technical rules, circuits and etc, I would have to write so many things....I'm not into this right now.

But one thing usually people don't take in consideration is the human side, If I had the power to do that change, I'd try to make F1 closer to the fans, make it a healthy and accessible sport for all. There's too much luxury ostentation, there's too much vanity, this makes F1 very boring and even unpleasant at some point, that's very far from being a virtue. No wonder so many drivers get exhausted when in the end of their careers - it's not only the competition stress, it's the excess of flamboyance, in some levels that's not natural and healthy at all. Of course this is due to the amount of money the series moves every year, so more money means more people distant from reality, so more flamboyance and more trashy values. Not everyone has "stomach" for that.