"Simplify, then add beer" (jeffoh)
01/20/2014 at 23:23 • Filed to: F1, Formula 1
0
8|
"Simplify, then add beer" (jeffoh)
01/20/2014 at 23:23 • Filed to: F1, Formula 1 | 0
| 8 |
I've been reading a fair bit lately about the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! towards the pending double points rule in the 2014 F1 season. In the interests of fair debate (and because I'm a fence sitting asshat), I thought I would offer the counter points. Feel free to hate away in the comments.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Why double points should be in the last 3 races of the season.
There is no question that Formula 1 needs a shake up. 2013 has been often called the most !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! season in many years. I present 3 reasons why the rules should change:
1) Red Bull Racing
Over the last 4 years we've seen the Austrian fizzy drink company absolutely dominate the competition. From their genius team principal Christian Horner, to the Technical Alchemist that is Adrian Newey, to what could be the greatest F1 driver of our generation, right down to the fastest pit crew in the world, RBR are unstoppable. By the time we get to the US race in November there is a statisical probability that they will be in front of both the Drivers and Constructors Championships. At this point the double points are either going to cement their 2014 victory, or allow someone like Ferrari to catch up quickly. If the former happens, it was already a dreary season. If its the latter, that could be quite entertaining.
At the very least, it will be a change from what we've seen.
2) More viewers, more money. Not just for Bernie
Considering that Ecclestone has made billions from television rights, it is not surprising to note that this new rule could easily raise view numbers for the back end of the season - Abu Dhabi in particular. However this is not necessarily a bad thing. Struggling teams like Lotus & Caterham need the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! to fund their teams. More ratings, more money in TV rights, ergo more money to the Formula One Teams Association.
In the end, having these smaller teams makes things more entertaining (even if only for the first corner shenanigans)
3) Push Push Push
Mark Webber has said on a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! that F1 drivers rarely push the limits on themselves or their cars. Between degradation of tyres, team orders and engine conservation, most drivers only really push it to the limit 10-15% of the race. Now imagine if its the last 20 laps of Interlagos. It is raining, and in any other season both the team managers and drivers would just focus on getting across the line. However if 50 points are up for grabs I can imagine a number of drivers will suddenly find their team radios not working and throw everything they have into it.
This is when we may start to see real racing again.
ddavidn
> Simplify, then add beer
01/20/2014 at 23:30 |
|
Good points, not sure they change my mind on the whole thing. I want to see all those things come to life, but am not sure double points is the way to do it.
|
Simplify, then add beer
> ddavidn
01/20/2014 at 23:39 |
|
I keep asking myself what the alternative is.
Do you remove the restrictions on testing, spending and engine management, and let it be a war of budgets? At best it will be a RBR/Ferrari battle, or we could see entire seasons with one manufacturer on the podium.
Do you force more homologation to the point where the cars are almost identical? Boring.
Do you force a change of drivers every 2 seasons to shake things up? Maybe, but we all love to have our favourites and hate on others.
ttyymmnn
> Simplify, then add beer
01/20/2014 at 23:45 |
|
1) If Ferrari or Mercedes (probably not McLaren, though it would be nice if they were in the hunt) need double points to catch RBR, then it really does negate the whole season. Let's say they've been a consistent second to RBR all season. Scoring some points, gaining some podiums while RBR has been consistently better. The current system rewards consistency, and we've seen teams and drivers win without getting a majority of wins (which lead to Bernie's cockamamie medals idea). If RBR were consistently in the lead all season, then why should they run the risk of losing the championship in a rigged points system if they hit a run of bad luck in the last one or two or three races?
2) I'm not convinced at all that extra points will bring more viewers. What will bring more viewers is more exciting racing, not rigged points systems. If you took RBR out of the picture, then 2013 would actually have been a pretty interesting season. But you can't. Scrap all these idiotic rules that are turning F1 into a spec series with aerodynamics. Give more money to the struggling teams so they can have at least a chance to compete.
3) Your third argument is perhaps the most convincing. The current rules definitely favor conservative driving. It's amazing that we can get as many races out of one engine as we are, but that leads to boring races. Reduce the draconian penalties for changing a gearbox. There's no reason that we have to go back to the days of a one-lap wonder for qualifying that could never survive a race. Qualifying is great, and is usually more exciting than the race. But if you break a gearbox, hell, you break a gearbox. Maybe take some money, or say that they have to put some money into a pot to be won at the end of the season somehow (like Free Parking in Monopoly). Tire allocations are killing the sport. Give them the damned tires and let them use them.
|
ddavidn
> Simplify, then add beer
01/20/2014 at 23:57 |
|
No, no war of budgets.
No, no identical cars...
No, no forced driver changes...
I don't have the answer, but every race I try to find a way to improve it, and really let the drivers push the limits. Haven't come up with anything solid. If double points is really going to help, I'm willing to try it for a season.
Tim (Fractal Footwork)
> Simplify, then add beer
01/21/2014 at 00:03 |
|
I'll be a hater, since you referenced my post.
Only this last season has Red Bull dominated by so much.
|
Simplify, then add beer
> ttyymmnn
01/21/2014 at 01:38 |
|
1) By the time you get to the last 1 or 2 races, the Championship is usually in the bag. All things being equal, the extra points should make no difference. However, there is a slight chance it could throw everything on its head, making for some interesting watching
2) The idiotic rules were designed to keep teams like RBR from being miles ahead. Unfortunately they are too bloody good. Removing the rules is just going to make things worse.
With regards to spreading the wealth around to teams; consider this. Red Bull's 2013 budget was approx $387,044,250. Marussia's was $83,81,850. That is a lot of playing field to even out.
3) Tyre degradation is necessary to ensure pit stops, otherwise it is more efficient to not pit at all. The only way they can resolve the Pirelli disaster is to bring back refuelling. If they can make it safe, they can force drivers to pit more.
|
Simplify, then add beer
> Tim (Fractal Footwork)
01/21/2014 at 01:42 |
|
Vettel had 2011 sewn up by Japan. Hamilton's wins could have made things interesting. 2012 would have been different as well, with Vettel not winning the last 3 races.
herald
> Simplify, then add beer
01/28/2014 at 22:44 |
|
Step 0: Get rid of Bernie Eccleston, and replace him with someone who loves the sport.