FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[CookinFlat6]

All Im saying is that a testing ban is an effective way of cutting costs across the board. I didnt think it up. The FIA did. I asked you a question along the lines of 'how many extra sessions makes the extra costs worthwhile? 2,10, 30?. If only a few, what difference does it make, there argument that there is NO testing or opractice at all is flawed because there is. So if not unlimited, how many more extra and why?

You didnt answer this. Say each extra testing session costs each team 100k and teams like Lotus have just written to their staff telling them not to expect payment yet and to make other personal arrangements to prevent banking charges and penalties.

So say they cannot afford even 1 extra session, that means those that can gain an unfair advantage leading to a less competitive Lotus and only a few teams left competing on the same level as this season

So tell me, 1 extra session or 2 or 10? and why?

[sagi58]

All Im saying is that a testing ban is an effective way of cutting costs across the board...

So tell me, 1 extra session or 2 or 10? and why?

Sure, it's effective in cutting "operating" costs across the board; but, at what cost??
Especially next year, where you'll have new engines, tires that aren't available for
teams to take them into consideration whilst designing/developing/building cars.

By the way, implementing a driver salary cap is something that could be looked at;
but, it doesn't seem like anyone is keen on suggesting that, eh?

As for how many "extra" sessions goes, I wouldn't dream of giving you a number!!
Why? Because I believe that the teams themselves should be consulted on what
they feel they can financially handle. AND, once again, for the record, I believe
teams should be given the OPTION to test on track or not.

[CookinFlat6]

Good idea, let the teams each decide how much testing they can each afford and go from there, but dont call it unlimited testing

A salary cap has lots of implications with regards to employment law in different global regions they race in. Also its easy for the team not to pay the driver at all - like Alonso

It seems that lots of things have been thought about and tried and nothing works to reduce costs and stop F1 imploding. The only call for extra testing is to do with new tyres, but the general testing ban has worked to cut costs and make it fairer for all teams, thats why no one wants a return to unlimited testing.

except Ferrari and the tifosi

[racechick]

They left it a bit late in the season but a good show from McLaren today, from both drivers.

[sagi58]

Good idea, let the teams each decide how much testing they can each afford and go from there, but dont call it unlimited testing

A salary cap has lots of implications with regards to employment law in different global regions they race in. Also its easy for the team not to pay the driver at all - like Alonso

It seems that lots of things have been thought about and tried and nothing works to reduce costs and stop F1 imploding. The only call for extra testing is to do with new tyres, but the general testing ban has worked to cut costs and make it fairer for all teams, thats why no one wants a return to unlimited testing.

except Ferrari and the tifosi

I didn't want/expect un-limited testing, as that doesn't make sense either; but, we've swung from one extreme to the other and neither works towards equity for all teams!!

I would very much doubt that any of the drivers on the grid are making minimum wages which is what most (if not all countries) mandate by law!! I mean, really, can you see any of them living below the poverty line in any of their respective countries of citizenship??

I see you're still , eh?

[CookinFlat6]

I didn't want/expect un-limited testing, as that doesn't make sense either; but, we've swung from one extreme to the other and neither works towards equity for all teams!!

I would very much doubt that any of the drivers on the grid are making minimum wages which is what most (if not all countries) mandate by law!! I mean, really, can you see any of them living below the poverty line in any of their respective countries of citizenship??

I see you're still , eh?

Here was I thinking I was explaining something to you, something I do not neccesarily think is ideal but is the way it is for real world reasons. The reasons are what I am putting across,

for example a salary cap was discussed but it became obvious it wouldnt work because the teams would simply pay the amount and do deals with sponsors or third parties to pay the driver the rest. Therefore nothing much would change as far as cost cutting

[sagi58]

Here was I thinking I was explaining something to you, something I do not neccesarily think is ideal but is the way it is for real world reasons. The reasons are what I am putting across,

for example a salary cap was discussed but it became obvious it wouldnt work because the teams would simply pay the amount and do deals with sponsors or third parties to pay the driver the rest. Therefore nothing much would change as far as cost cutting

I didn't mean to sound ungrateful, as I do appreciate you doing so!!

Since you don't "necessarily" agree with the status quo, what would you suggest?
Do you think a total ban on testing is ideal or should "some" testing be allowed?

Also, in spite of "other" ways of paying drivers, what would be wrong with that?
As long as the teams didn't have to fork over more than the cap allowed, why
would that be a problem?

Or is that make all the drivers on the grid "pay drivers"??

[sagi58]

p.s. my "fishing" comment referred to you mentioning Ferrari "gratuitously" and "negatively" every chance presented to you!!

(( at least, you're predictable!! And, yes, so am I!! ))

[CookinFlat6]

You have 10 teams, only a couple of which are owned by manufacturers who can spend a few hundred million a year without any return because they are effectively using the money as a marketing budget for their main business

The other teams need sponsors and advertisers and need to pay for staff and engines etc

It has been found that F1 works best with many teams, not just a few

Its hard to get new teams to come along when there is no profit to be made, only losses trying to compete with the current format

It is not a profitable business because the costs have become far greater than the prize money and what sponsors spend

Many teams are struggling to make the grid year by year and its geting worse as sponsors get rarer and pay less. Some teams are lucky in having the few last sponsors that can afford to put hundreds of millions in

Therefore the conundrum is how to encourage more teams to participate and how to make the sport remain interesting and competitive

If the teams were allowed unlimited spending then it would become the richest win, but there are only 2 who would even be on the grid as the others wouldnt be able to afford a parade lap - if it was unlimited spending

eg weight, teams could be allowed to have whatever wheelnuts they want, the richest would have those that cost 100x and weighed y/100. The poorest would have ones that cost x and weighed y/50. So the richer teams will have half the weight but would have spent 100 times to achieve that

Now if someone told all the teams they could only have wheelnuts weighing y/50, then the incremental advantage of the y/50 disappears but the team saved 100x. And it means the poorer teams are able to compete, therefore they can stay in the game, and the viewer doesnt even notice the 0.00056 sec advantage that came with the 100x spend

So far so good, but how to police this type of unilateral cost cutting? Cant have the FIA weighing each wheelnut at each pitstop. They tried an RRA that the teams could stick to but that didnt work because of self interest from the rich.

Then someone had a bright idea of removing the need to test as much as one could afford by removing testing. This all worked well until the tyre fiasco, the FIA and its dumb ideas about the tyres meant the supplier was chopping and changing each season- not good when there is no testing

So Ferrari now use the tyre fiasco to try sneak unlimited testing back in, that didnt work as the other teams like the money they are saving and are beating Ferrari anyway.
So any extra testing works for the rich teams and against the others who have limited funds.

So we need to understand why the no testing rule, which sounds silly in a sport, but isnt when you actually drill down into it and realise that testing is not for drivers, they are expert drivers already, its for testing parts really, there is no danger from pro drivers having just one practice session before racing. never has been and never will be

So the argument is not about drivers needing to practice, young ones maybe and guess what? they have a YDT

Thats how I see it, so we need to be clear what we are calling for and why, do we want 2 teams or many in F1?

EDIT for technical detail: the wheelnut example is analogous, it is not an example of how costs are cut due to the long established minimum weight rule. It is more a conceptulisation of the cost/benefit equation and the law of diminishing returns

Edit for Salary cap subdiscussion: If a team pays a supplier 2 mill a year and pays the driver 5 mill. If a salary cap of 2 mill is imposed than the team would pay the driver 2 mill and pay the supplier 5 mill and the supplier would pay the driver 3 mill 'consusltancy' fee. So no net saving for the team

[LewEngBridewell]

They left it a bit late in the season but a good show from McLaren today, from both drivers.

Indeed, it was good to see them clawing their way back up, after a disaster of a year.

Hopefully, it's the sign of better things to come. We need them back at the front, for the sake of the competition, for the sake of the sport.

[1Lemon]

RE: the testing debarcle.

Couldn't you give the teams an extra 2/3 sets of tyres and 1 more engine to only be used in practice sessions, (Obviously 3 sets of tyres per race only for practice, and an engine spans the season) then that would ensure more running in the practice, and would encourage teams to use their dev/test/reserve drivers a bit more.

[racechick]

They left it a bit late in the season but a good show from McLaren today, from both drivers.

Indeed, it was good to see them clawing their way back up, after a disaster of a year.

Hopefully, it's the sign of better things to come. We need them back at the front, for the sake of the competition, for the sake of the sport.

I did have to laugh out loud though when Jenson was interviewed. He said the only time we don't work on set up in practise ( because of rain) the car is good.

[1Lemon]

So all this talk about how they never have a hope in hell to get a podium, and how button was mad even suggesting it. They got 4th and a stunning 6th...

[racechick]

So all this talk about how they never have a hope in hell to get a podium, and how button was mad even suggesting it. They got 4th and a stunning 6th...

Yes, after a year of trying they did well today. I'd even suggest Perez for driver of the day. As I said though, it's funny it happened at a race where they couldn't work on set up, it's like when they try to set the car up its worse, when they just do nothing and get in it, it's good. Odd. But yep, a very creditable performance today.

[1Lemon]

Australia 2014 "Ok Jenson how are we setting up the car? " "DON'T DO ANYTHING TO IT EVER!"