Long Term Trends in Formula 1

[Maxmil]

With the testing about to begin, and the first race of 2002 not too far behind, I thought we should take a few minutes to step back from the day-to-day F1 news and debates and consider the larger forces that are driving our sport in the early years of the new century. I can identify three importent ones, and I'm sure the rest of you can suggest others.

(1) The involvement of the motor manufacturers (MM's). Ferrari(Fiat), Mercedes Benz (Daimler/Chrylsler), Jaguar (Ford), BMW, Honda, Renault and now Toyota. If Prost makes it to the grid, 9 out of twelve teams will be getting their engines from the MM's factories. If VW and GM come in as has been rumored many times, the chances are the entire grid will be so powered. The implications of this are profound. For example, the MMs want the F1 TV program management to fit their needs better (Addition of races in emerging markets.), and to have a greater control and share of this important revenue source. (The rise of the possible "Manufacturers Series.") The name of the game is to sell cars worldwide, and the MMs, as well as F1 management, are well aware that F 1 can do this. In short, the product has been commercialized. It is really no longer a "sport", although many fans don't like to admit this, and pretend that it is. Long term, they may get fed up with the commercials and turn to other forms of entertainment.

(2) A Dominant Driver. Rarely in the past has F1 been so dominated by a single driver. The 1950's with Juan Fangio is the period that most resembles the present. Say what you like about Michael Schumacher and his tactics, but every time he has started a race, he scores almost 5 points. None of his present competitors exceed 3 points/start. So long as this continues, he will retain the WDC. (The only driver to exceed that level was Fangio with almost 5.5.) It seems to me that the fans are coming to both love and hate this state of affairs. One group has deified Michael, and another - probably larger - has demonized him. It is difficult to conduct a conversation without taking sides. While this split leads to an increase in worldwide interest in the sport, it has also made it downright boring to witness, which is very worrisome in the long run. F1 badly needs more truly competitive drivers to retain it's dominant position in motor racing. Races without overtaking are boring. Ultimately the fans will find more exciting diversions.

(3) Technology has run amok. The percieved need for speed, fettered only by the concern for driver safety, has created a vehicle which bears little resemblance to what we drive on the road, or at club races. The teams' software engineers are now more important than their mechanical engineers. As the electronics and aerodynamics, not to mention advances in power plants, produce faster and faster cars, F1 management imposes ever more restrictive rules to rob the engineers of the results of their labors. F1 management has also enforced changes to almost all racing circuits in the name of "safety" that have had the effect of removing the spectators farther from the courses and of making overtaking more difficult. Higher technology is also leading to more boring races. This is already a great concern for the future.

Those are my top three. What would you add?

[Nicholas]

4) Mickey Mouse circuits? (No offense to Disney )

[SILVERS95]

5.....having a silly man in charge of the FIA called Max Mosley who actually beleives that people want top see cars overtaking in the pits whilst one of them is stationary , rather than seeing them race wheel to wheel at high speed .

[Kelstea]

Silver95 I couldnt have put it better myself!
I long for someone to overtake in the old fashioned manner with speed and skill.Less technology and more real driving.

[SILVERS95]

the worring thing is that Max Mosley actually thinks he's right ...but i can honestly say that i dont know anyone who really wants to see more place changes in the pit lane ...yes they can be exciting , but its pure racing that we all want to see.....

[EERO]

Max,
some wise and thoughtful points.

I think what makes the current phase so distinctive is the coupling of your first two points. Schumacher is clearly dominant, but despite his skill, one of the reasons for his dominance is the amount of money Fiat pours into the Ferrari team. Clearly, success in F1 is directly proportional to capital expenditure. The top three spenders have dominated the sport for the last 20 years, which leads sus to point no. three.

I agree that F1 is potentially making itself a boring spectacle at the same time that it enjoys its greatest success.
If Schumacher were not in the best, most well-funded car, we'd have a real treat watching him struggle against Williams and Maccaroon. Instead, we fear that the majors will tire of the sport as they inevitably must, and we will witness a gaping hole where teams once filled the grid. Bernie seems to believe that 12 teams make a full grid since Honda was awarded the twelth spot in '97. However, with the advent of TOYOTA, we are witness the death throes of Prost and Bernie has yet to field his 12 teams. The sport is too expensive and the escalating costs have destroyed competition.

I don't know what the solution is but the trends you have so succinctly outlined don't point to a bright future.

[djb]

So Eero, is this other team the nut, the dance or that country in North Africa?

Alas, I digress

Some thoughts--the fact that mo' money tends to get the gold ring really hasn't changed all that much hasn't it? Whether it is the aero and software advantages of today that come with mucho dinero, or the all-electronic days of 15 years ago, more money means more development and hiring the brighter guys with the new ideas, and hasn't this always been the case in racing? This does touch on the whole issue of the aero development and it's higher percentage of importance on a cars behavior given the grooved tire situation etc. And this leads into the whole passing/no passing thing as well, plus I believe, not giving some drivers to make up for a lesser car. I think it is fair to say that 20,25,30 years ago, extremely talented drivers did have more leeway in proving their mettle against superior cars. This is a recurring theme in discussions, and for me, it is still the crucial item for the future.

And Eero, wouldn't you agree that the greatest sucess part is entirely due to the advances of communication combined with promotion. When we were kids, there wasn't live coverage of races and qual., no (usually) fantastic incar camera views, etc etc. Today a huge number of households have cable TV with channels that cover the F1 season, and I think it's fair to say that alot of viewers do not have a deep interest, but certainly fill the bill for the commercialization part of the sport.(which you could also easily argue that it has been 25 years that the over commercialization bit has been an issue)

All in all, I don't see auto racing ever getting out of the fact that more money tends to create a better developed machine. Just as the best drivers tend to gravitate towards the best car (same in bike racing or whatever). So as much as this is an ad nauseum repeated topic, change the aero rules/tires and the racing will be closer and great drivers in lesser drivers will have more of a chance. And finally, hell, it's still pretty darn entertaining anyway, and yes I can't wait to see if SOMEONE can be a consistant challenge to Ferrari this year.(even better, a few SOMEONES)

[EERO]

Deej,
I'm not about to stop watching. You are correct that it is still pretty exciting. But I cannot hlp wishing it were more competitive. As I said, I see no long term solution and I remain adamant that the involvement of the major Manufacturers will in the long term be a bad thing. Perhaps it will be cyclical and a new wave of "Garagists" will arise to fill the gap when DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Honda and TOYOTA all go away.

(Let's face it it all comes down to "That German Fellow"; if he were to retire, we might actually see some racing!)

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by EERO
(Let's face it it all comes down to "That German Fellow"; if he were to retire, we might actually see some racing!)

Not really... close cars, but still dependent on pit stops for passing... the aerodynamic issues wouldn't be settled.

That's the real problem, in my view.

[SILVERS95]

and that's where we come back to Max Mosley again.....he is the guy that doesnt seem to want to take away alot of aero downforce , and until that happens , cars are always going to have to drop back when following cars through fast corners.

[EERO]

Originally posted by Ray Bell


Not really... close cars, but still dependent on pit stops for passing... the aerodynamic issues wouldn't be settled.

That's the real problem, in my view.

And I would agree with you, my comment was uttered tongue in cheek.

I think, Ray, the trends that Maxmil ellucidated don't bde well for the future of F1. Clearly Max Mosely wields a tremendous amount of power that seems counter to the good of the sport, but them NO ONE like Balestre.

The trend that disturbs nme the most has been prevelent since the mid-eighties as McLaren took charge. Every season, we see one team that almost completely overshadows the rest, maybe 1999 was different, but that was only because of the absence of TGF for much of the season.

Until the rules are rewitten to promote close racing and on-track passing, we are getting half the picture.

[Maxmil]

Originally posted by EERO
The trend that disturbs nme the most has been prevelent since the mid-eighties as McLaren took charge. Every season, we see one team that almost completely overshadows the rest, maybe 1999 was different, but that was only because of the absence of TGF for much of the season.

Until the rules are rewitten to promote close racing and on-track passing, we are getting half the picture.

Very good point EERO, this is another very important development, but I have alot of trouble coming up with convincing reasons why it has occured, and even more difficulty in determining if it will continue. It seems logical that if the barriers to overtaking were substantially lowered then this trend towards dominance of one team at a time would be reduced or even eliminated. Another factor is the one that others have mentioned above which is the budget level. The economics of sponsorship clearly favor the development of a top tier of teams numbering, say, three or four at any one time. They all have massive amounts of money at their disposal. One team usually seems to be able to dominate this group. When the dominant team combines with a dominant driver you get the situation we have today and have had for some years. Money is not the whole answer though; just look at BAR. There are other factors at work as well.

[yossarian513]

Hello everyone, this is my first post here, so apologies if I duplicate previous conversations.

Strikes me that the biggest issue in front of F1 at the moment is the outlawing (in Europe) of Tobacco money in 2004. This will either see solely manufacturer owned teams survive (Grids of 10 cars? No thanks!) or a migration of races (& therefore teams) to the Far East.

Both of these options are extremely worrying, and- with the honourable exception of Team Willy- I do not see any long term plans being made to replave these funds.

On the plus side, at least Jordan will get rid of that AWFUL colour scheme....bring back the Green Car!!

[LucaBadoer]

welcome to the forum, yossarian513.

[Bononi]

I agree with you guys, the combination of the dominat driver and the dominant car has been a problem to F1. Wasn't it what should happen in 1994 with the Senna/Williams combo ? I guess Bernie learned a tough lesson then.
Not much we can expect from the current grid while TGF is on charge. Altough we have high hopes on JPM, Kimi, Heidfeld, Alonso and maybe Massa, these fellows (maybe) will turn up to be champions after the man is gone.
The rules and the eletronics had put all drivers in the same level, usually the lowest, and only the great ones with the likes of TGF stand above the rest.

[EERO]

Welcome to the Forum Yossarian, I hpe you choose to remain with us, and welcome back, Bon, we've missed you. I hope the Holidays were good to you.

[yossarian513]

Hi Guys, thanks for the warm welcome

Not sure that I perceive this dominant car & driver as so much of a problem- it is a state of affairs that started way back with Fangio his his Maserati, through Jim Clark in the (wonderful) Lotus, Senna & Prost in the McLaren through to Schumacher today...

What seperates Schumacher, and I think will weaken his claim to ultimate greatness, is his lack of World Class opposition...whenever Schumacher has been challenged he has fallen apart (Disagree? How about Hill in 1994, Villeneuve in 1997 etc etc...)It is only the lack of talent on the grid that makes Schumacher look better than he is

JPM will change this, I am sure. and in time will become the dominant driver, and then the best car & team will come to him. If you doubt this, see the in car camera in the US Grand Prix....160 mph, opposite lock on, and changing gear...! So I, for one, welcome this dominance, and then the new challenger to the throne will come again

Yoss

[EERO]

Certainly Fangio was without peer, but Clark was handicapped by the fragility of the Lotus which always offset his obvious supior ability.
What sets the Schumacher era apart from other eras dominated by a single is its longevity. Even Senna had Prost to contend with.

[Damon]

Yoss you are absolutely right. TFG will never be considered an all time great (in my eyes at least) a)because I am/was a Hill fan, b) because of the lack of strong opposition and c) because of his complete lack of morality when it came to the crunch. What he did in 94 and 97 will keep him a peg below Fangio, Prost, Clarke, Senna et al, no matter what he wins.

Some would argue that Senna was no different in this way through what he did in 1990. However, following the 1991 japanese GP and the acquisition of his 3rd world title he said that the the events of the 1990 season were a direct response to the political situation that engulfed the 1989 season. In other words his actions were against the FIA, he was setting the record straight.

If the great man were alive today he would be appalled as to what F1 has become, a sport where racing is secondary to politics.

[Mr V]

with the exception of being better the schu....senna was no different to the german regarding his tactics!!! the only difference is that the were proberbly drivers back in senna's day who wouldn't put up with it as much as the do nowadays!! (ms v rs at nurburg!!.....ms v mika spa 2000.....ms v damon all the time.....ms v jv jerez 97....regular pattern here!!!) what is refreshing is that it now seems that the is the new guy in town (so to speak) i.e jpm and maybe tgf (what does that mean anyway?????) won't seem as ruthless as in previous times because jpm won't put up with it.

[EERO]

Originally posted by mr v
maybe tgf (what does that mean anyway?????)

See my second post on this thread Mr. V. that should answer your question.

Its been used for several years now, (since 1999 to be exact)

[djb]

Yossarian, Yes you could say that we have ourselves a regular Catch-22 situation here don't we, with all these various factors mentioned.

(could not help myself to using that connection, even though it does sort of fit into the topic)

djb

[Bononi]

Thanks EERO. I'll still be here once in a while until the end of January, while my company are changing servers and other stuff. I guess until the beginning of February I'll be on full time again at the forums !

...and back to the topic, Senna was not very different from TGF, as much as others great champions. The major diff I see there is that TGF has the powers that be on his side, while Senna had to fight it back.

But, that doesn't make him morally any better than TGF...

[Airhead]

Originally posted by djb
Yossarian, Yes you could say that we have ourselves a regular Catch-22 situation here don't we, with all these various factors mentioned.

(could not help myself to using that connection, even though it does sort of fit into the topic)

djb

Darn,

You beat me to it dj.

It will be interesting to see where the next step forward will come. Renault's 111 degree engine? Tyre technology? Or what.

Despite the huge amounts of money spent in R & D the improvements are down to fractions of seconds only. Given the dichotomy of the rise in safety concerns and the rise in the speed of the cars due to the longetivity of the current technical rules. Perhaps it is time to radically change the technical rules in the hope a true inovation by a less well funded team could make them competitive. Sort of shake up the bottle and let's see what happens to the contents.

[EERO]

You're right, Moff. (Imagined I'd never say that),
Looking back at the history of F1, rules changes created a lot of uncertainty and mixed things up. The current rules have been fairly stable for some time now and the room for improvement diminishes as each team is comes closer to the absolute limits of the Formula.

I guess that means that Rules Stability is another trend that.