<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Four mistakes F1 must avoid</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/</link>
	<description>F1 Fanatic - The Formula 1 Blog with F1 news, pictures, video, comment and analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:25:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218943</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 09:07:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218943</guid>
		<description>Would there be any of this talk if cars could overtake each other more easily? Lets try less aero / more mechanical grip first and see how that goes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Would there be any of this talk if cars could overtake each other more easily? Lets try less aero / more mechanical grip first and see how that goes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Its Hammer time</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218585</link>
		<dc:creator>Its Hammer time</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:41:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218585</guid>
		<description>My other idea centres around &#039;why-on-earth-aren&#039;t-the- drivers-allowed-to-burnout-and-doughnut&#039; but i fear this will come across as a rant, so i won&#039;t...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My other idea centres around &#8216;why-on-earth-aren&#8217;t-the- drivers-allowed-to-burnout-and-doughnut&#8217; but i fear this will come across as a rant, so i won&#8217;t&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Its Hammer time</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218581</link>
		<dc:creator>Its Hammer time</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:34:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218581</guid>
		<description>&#039;There would have to be a suitable ‘carrot’ to stop them piling up in the first corner. $1,000,000 or 1WCP as inital thoughts&#039;

Actually, no, when i wrote this i wasn&#039;t sure about it. If you win this race you have an additional engine change for the remainder of the year...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;There would have to be a suitable ‘carrot’ to stop them piling up in the first corner. $1,000,000 or 1WCP as inital thoughts&#8217;</p>
<p>Actually, no, when i wrote this i wasn&#8217;t sure about it. If you win this race you have an additional engine change for the remainder of the year&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Its Hammer time</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218580</link>
		<dc:creator>Its Hammer time</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:26:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218580</guid>
		<description>I come from the view point that to change the inherent nature of an f1 weekend is wrong. I for one not only thoroughly enjoy both qualifying and the race in current format (ITV adverts not with standing), but i could not get permission from the missus to allow any more time to be earmarked &#039;motorsport&#039; over the weekend.

However, fridays could be made more interesting. Indeed, Silverstone was empty on Friday this year despite &#039;sold out claims at the time&#039; and so an effort to pep it up could increase profits.

What about something similar to the BMW procar. At least one RACE driver from each team has to compete, Renault, Toyota, Honda or BMW could easily provide 20 identical small hot hatchbacks, fill them with cameras and micro phones so we can see and hear the drivers. Include a couple of wild card seats for ex race driver TV presenters/ up and coming GP2 stars and drop the flag. In truely equal machinery we would see how Kimi/ Alonso/ Bruno/ Sutil/ Button/ Lewis compare with each other. Could also be a useful tool for teams to assess drivers true pace. Something like a Type R or a 130 BMW. Wouldn&#039;t cost alot comparibly, the space on the cars could be covered in sponsors to pay for it. Imagine Brundle or Coultard commentating &#039;australian touring cars style&#039; live at the wheel of a Clio Cup 182 hussling up behind Hamilton or Heidfeld.

There would have to be a suitable &#039;carrot&#039; to stop them piling up in the first corner. $1,000,000 or 1WCP as inital thoughts</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I come from the view point that to change the inherent nature of an f1 weekend is wrong. I for one not only thoroughly enjoy both qualifying and the race in current format (ITV adverts not with standing), but i could not get permission from the missus to allow any more time to be earmarked &#8216;motorsport&#8217; over the weekend.</p>
<p>However, fridays could be made more interesting. Indeed, Silverstone was empty on Friday this year despite &#8216;sold out claims at the time&#8217; and so an effort to pep it up could increase profits.</p>
<p>What about something similar to the BMW procar. At least one RACE driver from each team has to compete, Renault, Toyota, Honda or BMW could easily provide 20 identical small hot hatchbacks, fill them with cameras and micro phones so we can see and hear the drivers. Include a couple of wild card seats for ex race driver TV presenters/ up and coming GP2 stars and drop the flag. In truely equal machinery we would see how Kimi/ Alonso/ Bruno/ Sutil/ Button/ Lewis compare with each other. Could also be a useful tool for teams to assess drivers true pace. Something like a Type R or a 130 BMW. Wouldn&#8217;t cost alot comparibly, the space on the cars could be covered in sponsors to pay for it. Imagine Brundle or Coultard commentating &#8216;australian touring cars style&#8217; live at the wheel of a Clio Cup 182 hussling up behind Hamilton or Heidfeld.</p>
<p>There would have to be a suitable &#8216;carrot&#8217; to stop them piling up in the first corner. $1,000,000 or 1WCP as inital thoughts</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toby</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218557</link>
		<dc:creator>Toby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218557</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve got an idea that might suit Bernie (most victories wins)and teams that never score points. How about a reverse points system for both Driver&#039;s and Constructor&#039;s Championships? Team and Driver with the least points at the end of the season wins. Everyone gets points (1 for the win, 20 or whatever for last), car failure is punished to the maximum, as is driver error - in fact, the points tally after Brazil really would reflect each team/driver&#039;s season.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve got an idea that might suit Bernie (most victories wins)and teams that never score points. How about a reverse points system for both Driver&#8217;s and Constructor&#8217;s Championships? Team and Driver with the least points at the end of the season wins. Everyone gets points (1 for the win, 20 or whatever for last), car failure is punished to the maximum, as is driver error &#8211; in fact, the points tally after Brazil really would reflect each team/driver&#8217;s season.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beneboy</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218463</link>
		<dc:creator>beneboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:36:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218463</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s just go all the way:

Every driver in the top 10 has to make a pit stop in the last 10 laps.
They get out of their cars and run around them 3 times, get back in and rejoin the race.
No fuel can be added or tyres changed in this pit stop.

That should let the back markers win a few.

If any driver gets more than a 10 point advantage in the championship then they could start the next race once the field had finished their first lap.

Or

Get rid of most of the aerodynamic devices and give the teams some massive slick tyres instead, ban carbon brakes &amp; give us low fuel qualifying for Q3 and let all the teams pick their fuel load before the race.

If they really want to make us happy then let the teams innovate &amp; don&#039;t ban all of the new technology they develop.
Active suspension is good racing technology, traction control is not - differentiate between the two, allow the former, ban the latter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s just go all the way:</p>
<p>Every driver in the top 10 has to make a pit stop in the last 10 laps.<br />
They get out of their cars and run around them 3 times, get back in and rejoin the race.<br />
No fuel can be added or tyres changed in this pit stop.</p>
<p>That should let the back markers win a few.</p>
<p>If any driver gets more than a 10 point advantage in the championship then they could start the next race once the field had finished their first lap.</p>
<p>Or</p>
<p>Get rid of most of the aerodynamic devices and give the teams some massive slick tyres instead, ban carbon brakes &amp; give us low fuel qualifying for Q3 and let all the teams pick their fuel load before the race.</p>
<p>If they really want to make us happy then let the teams innovate &amp; don&#8217;t ban all of the new technology they develop.<br />
Active suspension is good racing technology, traction control is not &#8211; differentiate between the two, allow the former, ban the latter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melanie</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218442</link>
		<dc:creator>Melanie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 06:01:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218442</guid>
		<description>I think people are mistaking the purpose of this idea. I think the idea is not meant to intervene with any of the normal racing or even really meant to &quot;spice up&quot; the show. The idea comes from FOTA not from the FIA so I don&#039;t think it is meant to intervene with the racing.

The idea is properly more aimed at hardcore F1 fans (to give something extra back to the fans) and perhaps more for the spectators at the track. At many races there are sometimes still very few people on Fridays, so it would perhaps also make Fridays a bit more interesting for the not so hardcore fans.

But it might even be more interesting for the hardcore fans, we are always discussing who was really faster, tyre and fuel strategies saving the engine at the end or how well the track is rubbered in, or traffic; we are always speculating about these things. So something like this would perhaps provide us with some more definite answers. The truth of matter is even if we think it is a silly idea, I bet everyone would watch it in any case, and everyone would soon be debating that their driver has the most raw pace. 

There are perhaps better variations on the idea around(like letting the test drivers race on Fridays), but in principal I don&#039;t think it is a bad idea.

The fact that they are offering prize money, means that it isn&#039;t something that should get into the way of the actual grandprix&#039;s or even qualifying. Besides I don&#039;t think the FIA would approve of something like that in any case.

F1 should never even consider things likes ballast and reverse grids, things like that are just gimmicks, with different manufacturers it would be unfair to &quot;award&quot; mediocre type performances. Although it wouldn&#039;t be so bad to give points for pole and for the fastest lap, many other racing series&#039;s does this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think people are mistaking the purpose of this idea. I think the idea is not meant to intervene with any of the normal racing or even really meant to &#8220;spice up&#8221; the show. The idea comes from FOTA not from the FIA so I don&#8217;t think it is meant to intervene with the racing.</p>
<p>The idea is properly more aimed at hardcore F1 fans (to give something extra back to the fans) and perhaps more for the spectators at the track. At many races there are sometimes still very few people on Fridays, so it would perhaps also make Fridays a bit more interesting for the not so hardcore fans.</p>
<p>But it might even be more interesting for the hardcore fans, we are always discussing who was really faster, tyre and fuel strategies saving the engine at the end or how well the track is rubbered in, or traffic; we are always speculating about these things. So something like this would perhaps provide us with some more definite answers. The truth of matter is even if we think it is a silly idea, I bet everyone would watch it in any case, and everyone would soon be debating that their driver has the most raw pace. </p>
<p>There are perhaps better variations on the idea around(like letting the test drivers race on Fridays), but in principal I don&#8217;t think it is a bad idea.</p>
<p>The fact that they are offering prize money, means that it isn&#8217;t something that should get into the way of the actual grandprix&#8217;s or even qualifying. Besides I don&#8217;t think the FIA would approve of something like that in any case.</p>
<p>F1 should never even consider things likes ballast and reverse grids, things like that are just gimmicks, with different manufacturers it would be unfair to &#8220;award&#8221; mediocre type performances. Although it wouldn&#8217;t be so bad to give points for pole and for the fastest lap, many other racing series&#8217;s does this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chunter</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218439</link>
		<dc:creator>chunter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 03:16:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218439</guid>
		<description>I used to enjoy the series that was, at the time, called &quot;Toyota Atlantic Series,&quot; now I think it&#039;s just &quot;The Atlantic Championship&quot; (a CART orphan) but was once &quot;Formula Atlantic,&quot; in specification and principle it&#039;s like F3 with spec cars.

The reason I used to enjoy it was because the crews would make very basic mistakes that made the races completely unpredictable, like, sending the driver with loose wheel lugs, or sending a car while the fuel is still filling.  It&#039;s a bit sadistic but at the time I was 13 years old.

Mandatory pitstop windows are stupid, not just because someone should have the right to dare to run on spent tires, but you should also be allowed to change tires if you get a puncture before the &quot;window&quot; without being forced to stop again for no reason.

Success ballast is stupid, not because it is unfair to the winners, but because it is a road to hell paved with a good intention.  You see, ballast makes the car heavy, but it also can be used to adjust the balance of a car, and if placed strategically, it can give a tall car, like a touring car, a big advantage.  If success ballast was installed in Formula 1, the ballast weight would have to be negligible because of how razor&#039;s-edge sensitive the cars are, and I assure you, the engineers would use a weight-jacking system to create a sort of active counterweight suspension with the success ballast.

I have nothing against the bonus point for qualifying, though I agree it doesn&#039;t really add anything to the competition.  Best qualifications would make for a good tiebreaker following the &quot;most wins, most seconds,...&quot; if it was ever necessary to use it.  The bonus point for fastest lap, like Indianapolis&#039; &quot;leading at halfway&quot; prize, seems a bit meaningless, however.  Such prizes should earn drivers and teams money but not be worth points towards the championship.

I like the simplicity of F1&#039;s point system as well.  The only reason American series will give points to any competitors is that it serves as incentive for teams that cannot show at every race.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to enjoy the series that was, at the time, called &#8220;Toyota Atlantic Series,&#8221; now I think it&#8217;s just &#8220;The Atlantic Championship&#8221; (a CART orphan) but was once &#8220;Formula Atlantic,&#8221; in specification and principle it&#8217;s like F3 with spec cars.</p>
<p>The reason I used to enjoy it was because the crews would make very basic mistakes that made the races completely unpredictable, like, sending the driver with loose wheel lugs, or sending a car while the fuel is still filling.  It&#8217;s a bit sadistic but at the time I was 13 years old.</p>
<p>Mandatory pitstop windows are stupid, not just because someone should have the right to dare to run on spent tires, but you should also be allowed to change tires if you get a puncture before the &#8220;window&#8221; without being forced to stop again for no reason.</p>
<p>Success ballast is stupid, not because it is unfair to the winners, but because it is a road to hell paved with a good intention.  You see, ballast makes the car heavy, but it also can be used to adjust the balance of a car, and if placed strategically, it can give a tall car, like a touring car, a big advantage.  If success ballast was installed in Formula 1, the ballast weight would have to be negligible because of how razor&#8217;s-edge sensitive the cars are, and I assure you, the engineers would use a weight-jacking system to create a sort of active counterweight suspension with the success ballast.</p>
<p>I have nothing against the bonus point for qualifying, though I agree it doesn&#8217;t really add anything to the competition.  Best qualifications would make for a good tiebreaker following the &#8220;most wins, most seconds,&#8230;&#8221; if it was ever necessary to use it.  The bonus point for fastest lap, like Indianapolis&#8217; &#8220;leading at halfway&#8221; prize, seems a bit meaningless, however.  Such prizes should earn drivers and teams money but not be worth points towards the championship.</p>
<p>I like the simplicity of F1&#8242;s point system as well.  The only reason American series will give points to any competitors is that it serves as incentive for teams that cannot show at every race.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the limit</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218435</link>
		<dc:creator>the limit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:48:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218435</guid>
		<description>I had to laugh at your spin off article from this one Keith about the Daytona 500 and how annoying Darrell Waltrip is. If you want real annoying, listen to his brother Michael, he has an ego the size of Texas and talent the size of Rhode Island. 
 To the point at hand, the basic structure of Formula One races is good, but I would like to see more incentive for rewarding drivers who lead laps. Maybe a points system for the driver who leads the most would not be a bad idea, and rewards the spirit of the enterprise, which is to come first!
 On the odd occasion when a team that would normally not be a contender leads a race, such as Renault did recently with Alonso, then that would indeed spice things up in the constructors championship aswell as the drivers.
 Also, a cash prize to the winner and the team should be introduced, with a cut in driver salaries so there is more incentive to actually race than just sit at the back of the field, ala Ralf Schumacher, and collect $30 million for doing sweet f.a.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had to laugh at your spin off article from this one Keith about the Daytona 500 and how annoying Darrell Waltrip is. If you want real annoying, listen to his brother Michael, he has an ego the size of Texas and talent the size of Rhode Island.<br />
 To the point at hand, the basic structure of Formula One races is good, but I would like to see more incentive for rewarding drivers who lead laps. Maybe a points system for the driver who leads the most would not be a bad idea, and rewards the spirit of the enterprise, which is to come first!<br />
 On the odd occasion when a team that would normally not be a contender leads a race, such as Renault did recently with Alonso, then that would indeed spice things up in the constructors championship aswell as the drivers.<br />
 Also, a cash prize to the winner and the team should be introduced, with a cut in driver salaries so there is more incentive to actually race than just sit at the back of the field, ala Ralf Schumacher, and collect $30 million for doing sweet f.a.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Roy</title>
		<link>http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/02/four-mistakes-f1-must-avoid/comment-page-3/#comment-218425</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Roy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:36:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/?p=10179#comment-218425</guid>
		<description>I have heard some crazy ideas but Amy that is the craziest ever.  2 or three random races a year you reverse the grid.  Apart from the fact that should one of the faster guys have a problem and end up on pole everyone would think it was fixed the whole idea is grossly unfair.  Imagine you are a driver and get the only pole of your career on the day that someone randomly decides to reverse the grid.

Pit stops do not spice up anything.  How many times have you heard a driver say that he decided to wait to see what happened at the stops rathe than just try and overtake the car in front.  Pit stops should be banned in all races in all clasees that run for less than 3 hours.  Let the drivers sort things out on track rather than let the pit crew/strategists/statiticans decide who wins.  Think of it being kinda like a race.  That works for me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have heard some crazy ideas but Amy that is the craziest ever.  2 or three random races a year you reverse the grid.  Apart from the fact that should one of the faster guys have a problem and end up on pole everyone would think it was fixed the whole idea is grossly unfair.  Imagine you are a driver and get the only pole of your career on the day that someone randomly decides to reverse the grid.</p>
<p>Pit stops do not spice up anything.  How many times have you heard a driver say that he decided to wait to see what happened at the stops rathe than just try and overtake the car in front.  Pit stops should be banned in all races in all clasees that run for less than 3 hours.  Let the drivers sort things out on track rather than let the pit crew/strategists/statiticans decide who wins.  Think of it being kinda like a race.  That works for me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: basic
Database Caching 11/24 queries in 0.038 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 476/480 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.f1fanatic.co.uk @ 2012-02-10 09:53:04 -->
