FORUMula1.com

[spankyham]

Chances are there will be only a few teams left on the grid soon, maybe each running more 3 or 4 cars

All these teams are sailing so close to the wind, all it will take is another credit crunch ( or the one we got already when the govs stop printing money) and its gonna be bye bye racing for many

Credit crunches don't have uniform effects. Some businesses thrive during these times - Ferrari have done pretty well through it all. There are even industries that tend to do well, ie movie theatres and fast food to name a couple. When some teams fall aside, others will take their place.

On the issue of having more than 2 of a particular type of car, I'd personally love to see a return to this. With the right constraints this could work well.

Or maybe go back to teams buying chassis from the larger ones.

Scheme like this would need to be controlled, but with the right rules, it could help with costs and could work well in F1 for the teams and fans.

[1Lemon]

Chances are there will be only a few teams left on the grid soon, maybe each running more 3 or 4 cars

All these teams are sailing so close to the wind, all it will take is another credit crunch ( or the one we got already when the govs stop printing money) and its gonna be bye bye racing for many

Credit crunches don't have uniform effects. Some businesses thrive during these times - Ferrari have done pretty well through it all. There are even industries that tend to do well, ie movie theatres and fast food to name a couple. When some teams fall aside, others will take their place.

On the issue of having more than 2 of a particular type of car, I'd personally love to see a return to this. With the right constraints this could work well.

Or maybe go back to teams buying chassis from the larger ones.

Scheme like this would need to be controlled, but with the right rules, it could help with costs and could work well in F1 for the teams and fans.

Yeah, it would bring some of the caterhams/marussia up to a relatively competitive time, it would cut costs and keep the dosh within the sport (Team A gets more money from team B for their chassis, more money to develop better chassis next year etc.)

[CookinFlat6]

Chances are there will be only a few teams left on the grid soon, maybe each running more 3 or 4 cars

All these teams are sailing so close to the wind, all it will take is another credit crunch ( or the one we got already when the govs stop printing money) and its gonna be bye bye racing for many

Credit crunches don't have uniform effects. Some businesses thrive during these times - Ferrari have done pretty well through it all. There are even industries that tend to do well, ie movie theatres and fast food to name a couple. When some teams fall aside, others will take their place.

On the issue of having more than 2 of a particular type of car, I'd personally love to see a return to this. With the right constraints this could work well.

Credit crunches have 1 effect we can count upon, companies that sponsor and advertise with F1 cut back, that there is the crunch pardon the pun) Primark and costcutter may thrive in a crunch but I dont see them sponsoring F1 teams to the tune of 10s of millions a year

Also Ferrari is one of the big four that I talked about surviving a financial slump, its the other 6, 7 teams I mentioned could vanish

[What's Burning?]

Would anyone show up to the show with Ferrari and Red Bull fielding 10 cars each because currently those are the only two teams that are the likely recession survivors going forward.

[CookinFlat6]

Doesnt sound too appealing but then how different would it be to Merc supplying chassis and engine and maybe funding another team or two. Like RBR and Torro Rosso, or Ferrari and there 'tame' customer team arrangements

Say Merc and Ferrari supply chassis and engines etc to 4 teams each, wouldnt be a stretch to see them doing deals or influencing the choices of management, drivers etc

Might as well just fund 5 cars each, there would be savings there.

Just cant see F1 staying as is much longer

[vaptin]

I love you too LRW, anyway I haven't clarified my point yet,


Lewis clearly meant he wanted Nico to move over, when he said "he was in a different race", does it really matter how it is said? I suppose, Grosjean wasn't told to move over then, cos he was just told that Kimi is faster than him? I mean, that isn't saying "move over" literally.


The different strategies thing isn't what I was saying, my point was, getting your team mate moved over, is basically saying (for whatever reason) "I have right of way", it might be because of different strategies in the race, or the team have different strategies longer term with their drivers (a No1 and No2 driver system, is a different strategy too, just it applies in a wider reaching scale).

That's what I meant by a sign of confidence and the idea of overtaking their team mate being a waste of time for whatever reason. Being on different strategies I think, does fit into my point, one driver moving over, is the teams way of saying "at this point in time we want to ensure this driver is ahead of the other", I mean, Lewis could still have passed in a racing move too, even on a different strategy, but it is surely obvious at that time he didn't want to, and I think my point about trusting in the team to favour their position over their team mates (i.e. confidence/ right of way) applies in that situation. The difference is, that if it is only applied to different strategies during the race, it probably won't happen as often as a No1, No2 situation, but I don't see how the limit of it, changes my point.

I mean, why doesn't different strategies count? It might be more common, or favoured, but it is still one team mate moving over for the other because the team feels it will bring a tactical/ strategic or otherwise competitive advantage no?

[racechick]

Well made point Vaptin.

I think if you ask another driver to move aside , or not hold up a team mate who is on a different strategy , you are doing it to maximise the strategy of the driver, probably both drivers, as fighting each other for no gain is fruitless, especially in the tyre save era.

If you ask a driver to move aside for a team mate on the same strategy when they are clearly fighting each other for position, then you are saying to the drivers, I prefer this driver to win. And if its the driver who makes the call, he's saying he deserves the win more, he is more important.

[vaptin]

Well made point Vaptin.

I think if you ask another driver to move aside , or not hold up a team mate who is on a different strategy , you are doing it to maximise the strategy of the driver, probably both drivers, as fighting each other for no gain is fruitless, especially in the tyre save era.

If you ask a driver to move aside for a team mate on the same strategy when they are clearly fighting each other for position, then you are saying to the drivers, I prefer this driver to win. And if its the driver who makes the call, he's saying he deserves the win more, he is more important.

The driver can request, and the team will still give instructions. Wouldn't all drivers pretty much prefer that they win?

Preferring one driver to win, is basically maximising the strategy of winning the WDC, which only one driver can win anyway. I mean, it's better to have 1 driver 50 points ahead of second, than 2 drivers who are only 25 points ahead of third (quantities are examples).

[CookinFlat6]

Asking a driver who is on a different strategy to let his teammate by is a logical approach for a team after a WCC. This maximises the finishing position of both driver as it allows each to exploit the strategy. If it was different team then not moving over and wrecking the strategy of an opponent team makes sense in the long run.

But with teammates its dot nothing to do with favoring one driver, more to do with harvesting maximum points for both drivers

Unless you are Ferrari and Massa can be completely sacrificed as all your eggs are in the Alonso basket (probably sensibly TBH). With the strongest pairing its plain silly for the team to let one driver wreck anothers chances and thats why Nico was asked to move over.

Lewis acted unlike any other top driver has done for a while, he just got on with it, didnt try to strongarm past risking an incident, no bitching and crying on the radio

Guy is on a different level, just needs the car

[1Lemon]

So Bianchi...

[Hammer278]

Asking a driver who is on a different strategy to let his teammate by is a logical approach for a team after a WCC. This maximises the finishing position of both driver as it allows each to exploit the strategy. If it was different team then not moving over and wrecking the strategy of an opponent team makes sense in the long run.

But with teammates its dot nothing to do with favoring one driver, more to do with harvesting maximum points for both drivers

Unless you are Ferrari and Massa can be completely sacrificed as all your eggs are in the Alonso basket (probably sensibly TBH). With the strongest pairing its plain silly for the team to let one driver wreck anothers chances and thats why Nico was asked to move over.

Lewis acted unlike any other top driver has done for a while, he just got on with it, didnt try to strongarm past risking an incident, no bitching and crying on the radio

Guy is on a different level, just needs the car

The car is coming, I'm pretty sure of it. Merc didn't expect to be ahead of Ferrari at any point this season, so they're ahead of schedule.

[sagi58]

...Unless you are Ferrari and Massa can be completely sacrificed as all your eggs are in the Alonso basket (probably sensibly TBH). With the strongest pairing its plain silly for the team to let one driver wreck anothers chances and thats why Nico was asked to move over.

Lewis acted unlike any other top driver has done for a while, he just got on with it, didnt try to strongarm past risking an incident, no bitching and crying on the radio

Guy is on a different level, just needs the car

Completely agree with your comments about Ferrari, after all there really is no reason to wait for it to be "mathematically" impossible for Massa to catch up, as that's just not going to happen, as has been proven since Alonso came to Ferrari!!

However, I'm not so sure about it being the "right" thing to do in the Mercedes case. Hamilton has not yet proven himself to be the better of the two with that particular car, yet Rosberg was able to outscore Schumi, an F1 legend, last year!! This is Hamilton's first year at Mercedes and I think it would be completely disrespectful for them to overlook Rosberg's contribution to the team at this point!

[racechick]

...Unless you are Ferrari and Massa can be completely sacrificed as all your eggs are in the Alonso basket (probably sensibly TBH). With the strongest pairing its plain silly for the team to let one driver wreck anothers chances and thats why Nico was asked to move over.

Lewis acted unlike any other top driver has done for a while, he just got on with it, didnt try to strongarm past risking an incident, no bitching and crying on the radio

Guy is on a different level, just needs the car

Completely agree with your comments about Ferrari, after all there really is no reason to wait for it to be "mathematically" impossible for Massa to catch up, as that's just not going to happen, as has been proven since Alonso came to Ferrari!!

However, I'm not so sure about it being the "right" thing to do in the Mercedes case. Hamilton has not yet proven himself to be the better of the two with that particular car, yet Rosberg was able to outscore Schumi, an F1 legend, last year!! This is Hamilton's first year at Mercedes and I think it would be completely disrespectful for them to overlook Rosberg's contribution to the team at this point!

I don't think anyone is suggesting Nico be overlooked. That's what Cookie meant when he said with the strongest driver pairing on the grid, the team have to let them fight it out. But when one is on a different strategy, they should know not to impede each other. Lewis is the last person to ask for favours, doesn't want to win that way. When he joined Mercedes he asked only for equality. And like you say, Nico has earnt the right to fight equally in that team.

But back to Ferrari, they operate a different system, and it seems to work for them. It's not my favourite, I particularly felt for Barichelo in the Schumi years. But it's their way and its all perfectly legal, so , each to his own.

[sagi58]

I don't think anyone is suggesting Nico be overlooked. That's what Cookie meant when he said with the strongest driver pairing on the grid, the team have to let them fight it out. But when one is on a different strategy, they should know not to impede each other. Lewis is the last person to ask for favours, doesn't want to win that way. When he joined Mercedes he asked only for equality. And like you say, Nico has earnt the right to fight equally in that team.

But back to Ferrari, they operate a different system, and it seems to work for them. It's not my favourite, I particularly felt for Barichelo in the Schumi years. But it's their way and its all perfectly legal, so , each to his own.

Thanks for the clarification!!

I might agree that Hamilton doesn't "ask" to be treated better; but, let's face it, at McLaren he was the "Golden Child" and the expectation was that any and all decisions were made to benefit him and his driving style.

In joining Mercedes, it would have been quite presumptuous of him to ask for anything, especially in light of his lack of results (i.e. WDC) these last few years. However, it would seem his fans are a bit of a different story.

Where Barrichello is concerned, I don't feel sorry for him, as he had a number of lucrative years at Ferrari! He knew the score when he signed on the dotted line, so he couldn't expect that anything should change during the term of any contract. Besides, like Massa (who at least got close), Barrichello wasn't ever going to beat Schumi over the season, even if he was able to get the odd win!

Nothing wrong with what either Ferrari or Mercedes do, as far as I'm concerned! Just as long as everything is on the table and each driver knows what's expected at each team!!

After all, as you say, to each his own!

[racechick]

I don't think anyone is suggesting Nico be overlooked. That's what Cookie meant when he said with the strongest driver pairing on the grid, the team have to let them fight it out. But when one is on a different strategy, they should know not to impede each other. Lewis is the last person to ask for favours, doesn't want to win that way. When he joined Mercedes he asked only for equality. And like you say, Nico has earnt the right to fight equally in that team.

But back to Ferrari, they operate a different system, and it seems to work for them. It's not my favourite, I particularly felt for Barichelo in the Schumi years. But it's their way and its all perfectly legal, so , each to his own.

Thanks for the clarification!!

I might agree that Hamilton doesn't "ask" to be treated better; but, let's face it, at McLaren he was the "Golden Child" and the expectation was that any and all decisions were made to benefit him and his driving style.

In joining Mercedes, it would have been quite presumptuous of him to ask for anything, especially in light of his lack of results (i.e. WDC) these last few years. However, it would seem his fans are a bit of a different story.

Where Barrichello is concerned, I don't feel sorry for him, as he had a number of lucrative years at Ferrari! He knew the score when he signed on the dotted line, so he couldn't expect that anything should change during the term of any contract. Besides, like Massa (who at least got close), Barrichello wasn't ever going to beat Schumi over the season, even if he was able to get the odd win!

Nothing wrong with what either Ferrari or Mercedes do, as far as I'm concerned! Just as long as everything is on the table and each driver knows what's expected at each team!!

After all, as you say, to each his own!

Well,Lewis may have been a golden child at Mclaren but certainly he didnt have decisions made in his favour. He was expected to support Alonso and was only put on equal status when his speed became apparent. And in the latter years he had to compete with Whitmarsh's politically adept paramour. Anyway, this thread is about Ferrari , so lets go back there. I like Massa and think his issues are psychological, which I guess is all part of the game. But he's fast when he's on it. Anyway, welcome to our forum I look forward to some excellent debates!