Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Hungaroring, 2012

Double DRS set for ban under 2013 rules

F1 Fanatic round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Hungaroring, 2012In the round-up: F1 teams agree to regulations outlawing Double DRS from 2013.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Double DRS to be banned for 2013 (Autosport)

“Following discussions at F1 rules think-tank, the Technical Working Group, sources have revealed that a majority of teams agreed for a change in regulations that will ensure they cannot incorporate double DRS into their cars for 2013.”

Lewis Hamilton: keeping trophies will be bargaining point with McLaren (The Guardian)

“In a lot of other teams, the drivers get their original trophies. As a racing driver, what you work for and what you want to take home are two things; one is your crash helmet and the other is your trophy. For me, they are priceless.”

Mid-season testing dropped from F1 2013 (Race Tech)

“There will be no mid-season Formula One test in 2013, it has been announced. The teams have also agreed that there will be just three pre-season tests next year.”

Lawsuit filed over F1 Austin land (Austin Business Journal)

“Land that is now part of the Circuit of the Americas facility is at the heart of a lawsuit filed against a Travis County investment manager and officials of the race track east of Austin.”

Lotus v Ferrari in fight for Kimi (The Sun)

“Raikkonen has refused to rule out the possibility, even though his relations with Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo became strained during his previous stint with the team.”

Mixed emotions (Sky)

Lewis Hamilton was the happiest and most open that I’ve seen him for ages. He’s become a Twitterholic, he left the circuit embracing his dad, and he was much more approachable and not charging around the place head down, under a cap, and behind dark glasses. He answered media questions with polite charm and engagement. From Friday morning until the chequered flag on Sunday afternoon he looked like the man most able and determined to win the race, in and out of the car.”

Interactive 360-degree video (Sauber)

Sauber have posted a video on their website showing Sergio Perez lapping the Circut de Catalunya. It features an interactive 360-degree camera mounted on the car’s nose.

Comment of the day

Ted Bell on how the teams have got to grips with the tyres this year:

The Pirelli factor has made the season so far very interesting. You just didn?t have a clue who was going to benefit from how those tires performed.

Now that the teams have really gotten a hold of how they work and how long they can last the races have become more about who really has an advantage via the quality of their race machines. If the season remains dry I think Alonso will find difficulty in holding his championship lead.

Pirelli has done a really good job, the tires they have brought to the plate have provided surprising results and have made for a very exciting season thus far.
Ted Bell

From the forum

Site updates

We had a brief period of down time yesterday evening for scheduled maintenance which was announced on Twitter. Further such maintenance is likely to take place during the summer break, I’ll endeavour to announce it in the round-up when possible, and will also announce it on the F1 Fanatic Twitter account.

Happy birthday!

No F1 Fanatic birthdays today.

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Mark Webber won the Hungarian Grand Prix two years ago today after team mate Sebastian Vettel was handed a drive-through penalty. Vettel had failed to stay close enough to Webber during a restart behind the safety car.

Image ?? Daimler/Hoch Zwei

115 comments on “Double DRS set for ban under 2013 rules”

  1. Can Hamilton really hold out for things like trophies in his contract? The way I see it is that he needs McLaren as much as McLaren need him at this moment in time. Red Bull have their two drivers secure and Alonso is very unlikely to allow Hamilton as a Ferrari team mate. Hamilton really doesn’t have any choice but to stay with McLaren if he wants to stay in a top team. Therefore despite Hamilton being undoubtedly one of the greatest drivers of our time, I don’t think he has that much bargaining power with McLaren.

    1. @ads21 you never know. Maybe he’d like to go to Lotus or Mercedes if he had the chance… I agree McLaren seems to be his only choice, but maybe moving somewhere else would be a boost for him. Staying in the same place forever isn’t good either.

      1. @fer-no65

        I agree with that. I think eventually, moving to another team will be the true test for Hamilton and also a good thing for his career.

        1. I agree, not even just the test, but he will mature as a driver. He has been with Mclaren too long, and the fact he was with them since he was very young affects the way they relate with him. It will always be difficult to make independent decisions.

        2. He still needs to be tested?

      2. @ Fer65
        I agree with that he’d get a new lease of life elsewhere. It’s time for him to fly the nest.

    2. Both Mercedes and Lotus are options, but I am certain that he’ll stay put with McLaren

      1. Lotus seems unreal, that’s a corporate mess. They have a good car, but who are they? Hamilton once said Red Bull is a drink company, questioning their long term commitment with F1 so would he consider joining Lotus that happens to be something else that is not Lotus and will probably have a different name in 2013?

        1. They will most likely have, different name. Unilever F1 or Enstone F1 :D

    3. If I was Ron Dennis and Hamilton said you can pay me less if I can keep my trophies, I’d consider it. Wouldn’t you?

      1. I don’t think Ron Dennis would.

        The principle is often greater than the reality.

        1. If Ron wouldn’t let Prost, Senna, Mansell, Hakkinnen, Coulthard, Raikonen, Montoya, Alonso, Button, Berger (the list goes on) keep theirs, it would be very poor form to give in to young Lewis’s demands. It would be akin to saying that Lewis is more important than all who have gone before him. Some would say its disrespectful of the team to retain the trophies but as it is such a deeply entrenched part of the Mclaren Team culture it is similarly disrespectful for Lewis to ask.

          1. Are you sure that none of them kept any trophies? Btw i don’t think Mansell has trophies with Mclaren he only drove a few races after all. And anyway even if they didn’t it doesn’t mean anything.
            For all we know Prost or Senna might not have cared that much.
            Personally i wouldn’t care ether as long as i was given an exact replica as Mclaren already does. I mean it’s basically the same thing just not the one the race organizers gave you. But who cares? It looks the same.

          2. @solo: Yup, none of them did. There’s even a story of Prost not giving McLaren his Italian GP winners trophy after he tossed it to the crowd. Ron Dennis was furious, and Prost had to get a replica made just to keep Ron happy.

            Very odd though that Lewis is holding off on trophies (for which he knows McLaren are strict on AND he can get replicas made for himself as you said). If I didn’t know better, I’d think he was looking for excuses not to sign with them…

          3. Just for the record, Lewis said drivers get to keep the “Original” trophies. Ergo, I assume they can replicate them.

            So Lewis is getting his trophies, just not the originals.

      2. Perhaps he should solve the problem at the source and try to get the FIA to award 1st, 2nd, 3rd “team trophies” on the podium as well as drivers, teams get theirs to keep, drivers theirs.

        Also gives something extra to those the team selects to accept the trophies on the podium.

    4. I think if a driver is going to fight for anything, it should be that.

    5. They can’t take the trophies unless they take responsibility. We all know the tech is important but when a driver does anything else other then win it is the “team’s” Under-performance (not is such clear words )that is the cause.

    6. Can Hamilton really hold out for things like trophies in his contract?

      He probably could – but he’d just have to be more flexible in other areas. Say he wants three years and the ability to keep his trophies. McLaren may offer him the ability to keep his trophies, but only if he signs up for five years.

    7. My first reaction to the Hamilton story was “why does he want three dozen crappy Santander logos for his mantlepiece?”

      But seriously, I think he should be wary of the message it sends for him to be insisting on this point. McLaren have row upon row of trophies in the MTC which everyone who works their pass every day. He should consider the implication of taking this tangible and visible link to their shared success away from the team members.

      Of course, as he correctly points out, it wouldn’t be a matter of contention in another team. But this is the way McLaren have always done it and it’s a heritage he’s bought into. The trophy case has even featured in all three episodes of Tooned…

      But I’m sure a compromise is possible here – such as giving him originals of the trophies from some special races, such as his first win, a home win or a Monaco win, something like that.

      1. I would have thought that originals would mean more to the driver than the team, and is it so hard to get replicas made for the MTC trophy cabinet? But you’re right in that if anyone should know the McLaren way of doing things, it should be Lewis Hamilton.

        I’m also thinking that, while I don’t want to treat the matter too lightly, if they’re negotiating over trophies then everything else must be agreed.

        1. My thought is that Hamilton wants to leave but doesn’t want to say it out loud. So instead he asks for something outrageous. That’ll keep both his value and McLaren intact. But where to go? Do a ‘Schumacher’ @ Williams?

          1. Makes sense. Some people leave town/country to get rid of their long term boyfriend/girlfriend :) It’s not easy!

      2. One word hit the nail.. Compromise.

      3. Spot on. McLaren, by insisting on keeping the all the trophies, makes it clear that the driver is not greater than the team.

        I like Lewis, but he’d do well to remember that…

        Also, I think I read somewhere that McLaren let Hamilton keep the original trophy for his maiden GP win in Canada 2007. I’ll try to find a link if I can.

    8. I actually think he needs Mclaren more. Mclaren are one of only 3 top teams (Lotus are good at the mo’ but who knows they can sustain that) and pretty much all of those seats are taken. Hamilton is one of the very best right now- when he’s on form he’s smashing but some races he crashes and other races he just doesn’t feature and when Mclaren do make one of their blunders he tends to hit out at the team in a strop. If Lewis left Mclaren could always gamble on a rising talent like Hulk, RoGro, Rosberg or di Resta. Hamilton may be one of the top 3 and I think they’d miss him but he certainly isn’t the only star, the grid is the most competitive it’s been in ages. My point is: Hamilton has a lot more to lose than Mclaren if they can’t reach a compromise so frankly I think he should just sign the contract.

      It’s funny though that at the start of 07 I never would have thought that in 2012 Lewis and Mclaren would have seemingly lost a little love for one another or that Alonso would be revelling in a Ferrari despite them giving him fairly poor cars. F1 is crazy.

    9. If Lewis goes to another team there may be no trophies to haggle over.
      For an individual diver to be trusted with history is a big ask, better they stay save at MTC

    10. Why not just have double the number of trophies? It is a way for everyone on the podium (even the non-driver alongside 1st place) can take one home and another is locked away in the HQ trophy case.

      I think it would be nice for Bernie to handle the trophy situation, I can’t imagine a few extra trophies would ruin the negotiations for tens of millions.
      Lewis cannot be the only driver that would like to keep the trophy presented to them on the podium, and it would be especilally sweet for the engineers, designers and pit crew that are chosen to join the winner on the podium.

  2. “There will be no mid-season Formula One test in 2013, it has been announced. The teams have also agreed that there will be just three pre-season tests next year.”

    I know they are trying to cut costs and all that stuff… But isn’t that a bit too extreme?

    1. @fer-no65 Considering the original plan was to only have the 3 preseason tests, and no in-season testing at all, I don’t think this is extreme at all

      1. @timi maybe. Only 3 tests during the year is not much, though. We had 4 this year, and that was already a record.

        I don’t know why they all suddenly want to drop the mid-season test. They pushed hard to get one this year… Did they find it pointless to have just 1 test afterall?

        1. @fer-no65 As @prisoner-monkeys one of the reasons is because the teams turned up at the first race with enough preparation. 3 tests was enough.

          The fact they were prepared enough, as well as them all trying to save money, it’s not too much of a surprise to me. I’m sure the mid-season test was very helpful (especially for ferrari). But I think what they have realised is that 3 is enough, and even if it isn’t.. everyone is in the same boat.

    2. @fer-no65 – I believe the reasoning is that everyone managed to get through their testing programmes in three pre-season tests this year, so they don’t see a point to holding the fourth. And they’ll save a little money in the process, but that’s just a bonus.

      1. I think that is exactly it @prisoner-monkeys, they found out 3 tests is enough, and after the long season they all would want as much time to prepare in between the seasons as possible.

        The fact that the Italian test did not really do that much to help anyone only makes it easier then to ditch that.

    3. AMuS reckon the 2013 testing dates are as follows:

      Jerez: 5/2/2013 – 8/2/2013
      Barcelona: 19/2/2013 – 22/2/2013
      Barcelona: 28/2/2013 – 3/3/2013

      I’d be surprised if they don’t up the amount of pre-season testing for when the new engines come in for 2014.

  3. In regards to Double DRS, it reminds me of the game Whack-A-Mole.

    Every time that a new Innovation comes into Formula One, it gets whacked over the head and then is eventually replaced by something else.

    That also gets whacked over the head.

    1. Then Maldonado whacks you

      1. There’s an in Russia joke somewhere, but it’s far too early for me to find it .____.

        1. We wanted to make it better, but it turned out as usual?

        2. @mike – In American, Pastor Maldonado crashes into you. But in Soviet Russia, Pastor Maldonado crashes into you!

          1. I Love the Pope
            1st August 2012, 15:40


          2. @prisoner-monkeys

            Nicely played PM, Nicely played.

    2. Exactly. They aren’t allowed to go any faster..

    3. Something else will be inovated :-D Tht’s how it goes

      1. And F1 wonders why it has lost relevance as an innovation platform for consumer cars…

        Im still hoping for a return to unlimited innovation with only saftey rules and a spending cap to ensure things dont get out of hand.

  4. I can’t imagine Hamilton having much luck getting his own trophies. It’s a long-time McLaren tradition to keep their drivers trophies (completely ridiculous though it may be). I do think he has more bargaining power than some give him credit though- the argument that he needs McLaren as much as they need him concedes in itself that McLaren also need him…

    1. I think the driver should always get to keep his trophies. The team keeps the constructors trophies. I don’t agree with what mclaren are doing.

      1. I agree, a F1 drivers career is relatively short, he should be able to show his grand children his trophies, even if only to give credence to his stories.

      2. Only the winning team gets a constructors trophy. Second and third just get the driver’s trophy.

        The McLaren drivers get replicas…its not as though they are left empty handed.

        Its a team sport…it seems to me that if the team want to keep the trophies they have every right to do so.

        Not really a huge deal, though.

        1. @kenny

          Replica is not the real thing. Why doesn’t the team keep the replica instead? The argument goes both ways. The major difference is that its called a “drivers trophy” for a reason. Otherwise they would have named it “teams trophy”. So the driver should get it and that’s that.

  5. For fear of being a Hamilton hater but…isn’t holding out and fighting over a stipulation about who keeps a trophy kinda egocentric? Especially since it’s McLaren and every driver before Lewis has had to give the team the winner’s trophy.I think the only trophy not at Woking is owned by some Italian after Prost dropped it on his head. I just can’t imagine trying to kill a long standing tradition at McLaren will go down very well with those who work at the team both in the garage and at the technology centre.
    I know that this probably isn’t the only factor stopping a new contract, but I’ve read about it a few times so it must actually be quite important to Lewis.

    1. @colossal-squid well, remember Hamilton only drove for McLaren, so he has not a single trophy from his F1 career at home. He must be one of the very few drivers that scored all his podiums with the team, and surely the most sucessful of those few drivers.

      It must itch a bit… I’m not sure you can call that egocentric. Afterall, he won those trophies too.

      1. … if McLaren could finally pull it together and win a Constructors’ Championship, maybe they wouldn’t need to keep Lewis’ trophies.

        1. Hahaha, it’s funny because it’s true. :D

        2. @steevkay I second that!

      2. He must have known that he wouldn’t get to keep his trophies when he first went to Mclaren so why the big problem with it now

        1. He wasn’t exactly in a position where he could try to negotiate back before he’d even been in a single race.

    2. David Coulthard was allowed to keep the trophy for second place in a Spanish Grand Prix following his plane crash (if I remember correctly).

    3. Perhaps negotiations are tough and Mclaren are making some difficult demands, hence he is holding on to this. While negotiating, you must also look for a good reason why you can’t agree. He may decide to drop the trophy, if he is guaranteed a winning car and equal terms as his team mate, or fastest qualifier determines the team strategy, or even have space for his personal sponsors, as that seemed to be an early area of contention.

    4. Prost had a replica made of the trophy he threw into the crowd at Monza in 1989 and gave it to Ron Dennis.

      As far as I’m concerned handing over your trophies to the team is part of what you sign up for as a McLaren driver and I don’t think Lewis should make this a deal breaker. Ron’s philosophy is that the team wins together and the trophies are the most tangible evidence of the team’s success, so the team gets to keep them. Whether you agree with it or not it’s part of the deal. Prost has said that he only has 4 trophies in his house,those are the 4 he got from the FIA for being world champion. The rest are either with McLaren or he gave them away.

      1. After all, its not as if without the trophies anyone would forget about the achievements!

  6. he is like a kid needing to feel loved… whats the difference betwen a replica and the original!!

    he has nowhere to go

    1. It’s obvious that you haven’t achieved much in life to be proud of. The least Lewis deserves, is a choice of one winning trophy for that year.

      1. Well said.

      2. This is not about me achieving something to be proud of (wich I’ve done and wouldn’t mind if my trophys where replicas because its not the metal in them that matters..its the meaning of them what matters….)
        You must be the equivalent of a “believer” to make that kind of response…

        1. its not the metal in them that matters..its the meaning of them what matters

          That argument to me suggests you think the opposite of what you originally said, as logically the two trophies are identical, using the same type of metal, so there isn’t a real reason to want the original over a copy, but it’s the meaning of an original, the knowledge that it has greater importance attached to it for no logical reason, that makes that so much more important than a forgery.

          1. the meaning its exactly the same in the original and in the replica…

          2. For you perhaps, but a lot of people would think otherwise.

          3. I see the point of @joac21, and offer this demonstration.

            Go get a dog.
            Love it, train it, and incorporate it into your family.
            Wait 13-15 years for the dog to die (painlessly and of natural causes)
            After that, get a new dog of the same breed and color.

            Now, ask yourself the question, even though the two dogs “look” the same, do you feel the loss of the old dog any less? Is the new dog a complete replacement for the old?

            I think you’ll find the answers to be “no”, it is not the same. We humans are funny creatures in the way we assign value to objects.

      3. Woolfy I think its the opposite. If one feels the need for some pieces of steel and glass to feel good about life, that is a very low level of achievement. Instead it should be enough to know he won all those trophies even without a single one to showboat with.

    2. If there is no difference then surely McLaren wouldn’t mind having one or two replicas so Hamilton can have one original trophy from his F1 career.

    3. whats the difference betwen a replica and the original!!

      @joac21 McLaren could well keep the replicas, couldn’t they? Afterall, they give the constructors a trophy when they win too. They already have that, they surely don’t need to keep the driver’s original trophy too!

    4. I like your perspective and it would applied to Lewis and McLaren too. It’s symbolic, you get a same material replica and you’re OK.

  7. I am absolutely shocked that McLaren keep the trophies. It never occurred to me that the teams might do this. Why don’t they keep the replicas for themselves?

    1. @trido

      I agree. Its ridiculous. Seems quite selfish given that team gets the constructors trophy. But i guess these are the terms of the contract if one wants to drive for McLaren. But i think FIA should intervene on this. Drivers trophy should belong to the driver.

    2. @trido Yes, they should keep replicas for themselves. Every European football club who ever won the Champions League are very happy with their replicas, same happens with World Cup winners, why in the world Ron is not happy with nothing but the real thing (which happens to be “owned” by someone else).

    3. they’ve always kept the trophies , how long have you been an F1 fan for

      1. Maybe they’ve only been a fan of F1 for a short amount of time. Why would that matter?

    4. Im sure I am in the minority, but I actually really like that McLaren insists on keeping all the trophies.

      In a lot of ways, it’s a statement that the team is greater than any of their drivers. It puts the driver in their place. As if they’re saying: “the few hundred of us that make up this team will do our best to give you the best car, and on-track support we can provide. and you, as a driver, will do the best you can to win with it. If everyone gets it spot on, the team wins, and the hardware stays with the team accordingly.”

      Keep in mind that it’s a contract stipulation, so the drivers have to agree to it. I like this approach, and I think it’s part of the McLaren ‘mystique’, if it can be called that.

      1. But if the team wins, they get a constructor trophy saying just that. The drivers trophy is, well, for the driver.

        1. But isn’t it always the driver and his support team that win the race? Or get a podium (by the way, you don’t get a constructors trophy for that)

  8. 2014 regulations are very similar to this year so I understand there’s less demanding of test. but I expect it would be increased in 2014 because huge regulation change and new engine.

    as for DDRS ban, I wonder how many teams considering the device. surely Lotus is closing to field debut but how’s other teams? Considering how the grid is so competitive, maybe some teams are regretting decision not to develop the device. It’s too late to start.

  9. It’s early, so I first read the headline as DRS being banned next year.

    Disappointingly, this confirms that DRS will be a part of the 2013 regulations :(

  10. @keithcollantine Despite not being an F1 driver, I think Al-Attiyah’s achievement deserved at least an honourable mention.

    1. @jcost Is he the Dakar winner who’s in the Olympics? There’s a forum thread for the Olympics here:

      London Olympics 2012

      1. Thanks @keithcollantine.

        I though an Olympic medal won by a Dakar Champion (even though that’s not the “real Dakar”) and WRC driver was worth a Roud Up mention.

        Never mind, I still believe Jenson Button will get his medal in Rio de Janeiro as triathlon athlete.

        1. @jcost

          I still believe Jenson Button will get his medal in Rio de Janeiro as triathlon athlete.

          Now there’s an interesting prediction!

  11. This Double DRS debate is getting more and more tiresome; F1 is getting much ore constricted, and soon there wont be any point in different manufacturers.
    But F1 has always been about innovation, and the FiA seem to hate that.
    It’s ridiculous, because the cars all look the same, and if the regulations were freed up a bit, with the teams allowed to develop certain parts on the car, then it would be more interesting, and it would generally stop the ‘controversy’ over ingenious solutions.
    I think that they should be given several areas which they can develop independantly, such as:
    The floor, the suspension, the front wing, the rear wing, and the diffuser, and all other structures above the driver. All you would have to do is decide simple things, like rear wing widths, front wing widths, maximum car width, and then just make sure that they pass the crash tests.
    They should then let the teams freely develop those areas, as long as they don’t go outside those dimensions.

    1. And the argument of the economy doesn’t really count; F1 teams have an enormous amount of money to spend, and there are no Greek or Spanish teams on the grid.
      Alternatively, if a majority of the teams aren’t in favour of free development, then just impose a budget cap of say £50 million or so.
      This could also allow more people to get jobs in F1, which can help to cure the unemployment level (admittedly not by much, but it’s a start.).

      1. There are no Greek or Spanish teams on the grid.

        Except for this one called Hispania Racing ;)

        1. They don’t really deserve to be in F1 though, so I don’t count them as a team.

          1. (too slow, and are struggling for theirt very existance, unlike caterham and Marussia, who have some solid backing)

          2. In my eyes that undermines your entire argument.

        2. something to consider is that the double drs has been banned by the teams & not the fia.

          the technical working group is headed by teams, they put forward proposals such as the double drs ban & send them to the fia wmsc who then vote on if to include them in the regulations or not.

          the double diffusers & f-duct bans were both banned by teams & not the fia & the stupid drs was also brought into f1 this way.

          1. @xjr15jaaag…the FIA doesn’t hate innovation, but they are well aware that freeing up the rules in this regard, which in the past has been done, results in a huge escalation in costs to run a competitive team because it becomes a money game of whoever has the most, wins. This discourages teams from staying in F1 and even entering F1 to begin with. To say that the argument of the economy doesn’t count is wrong. Only the top teams have big money, and even they don’t seem to have quite as much nor are willing to spend like the past, like it’s a bottomless pit for them…it’s just not today’s reality.

            And I think the downside to more innovation ie. costs to run a team, is that more teams would need pay drivers who aren’t necessarily the best drivers available, just the one’s that bring some money to the table. So that’s a negative, imho, of making F1 more expensive than it is. I’d rather see the best drivers in the world out there, not half a grid of best and half a grid of rent-a-rides.

            Nor is ‘just’ imposing a budget cap…they are talking about that all the time but it is hard to get everyone to agree on what amount that should be and how it should/could be policed.

            I do get what you are saying about innovation, or lack of it…I just don’t think it is as easy as you like to make it sound.

          2. @robbie
            All the teams need to do is co-operate, and maybe they can appoint an independant person to view the costs of each team, and that for every £100,000 they overspend, they get docked say 50 championship points, and each driver gets docked 25 championship points.
            To decide how large the budget cap should be, the fiA should get people with very recent previous experience of F1 at a managerial position to give a breakdown of the costs to make a car competitive over a season.
            You then dock 5 or 10 percent from that figure, and there is the budget cap.

          3. something to consider is that the Double DRS has been banned by the teams & not the FIA.

            Good point.

          4. So the teams might be finding ways here and there to police themselves and keep costs down without necessarily being forced to.

            @xjr15jaaag…again though, nothing wrong with your thinking given that the FIA have already been talking about and instigating cost-cutting measures (eg. much less testing, gearboxes and engines that have to last longer and longer) and budget caps, but it is a whole other thing to get all the teams to agree on everything, including how to police the caps. I suspect the teams will be able to find loopholes in whatever system they set up, just as they find loopholes to exploit regs that involve things like F-ducts/double DRS. So I just think you are making it sound way easier than it actually is. eg. Max Moseley’s proposals were shot down because the cost-cutting was going to be too drastic too quickly for the teams to just simply adapt to.

            As to the teams banning DDRS, I think that hints to cost-cutting measures in that even though Brawn likes to imply it is simply a few tubes that cost a bit of money, I think that is disingenuine. I think the can of worms that would be opened up would be that they are allowing a moveable device to affect another area of the car ie. a moveable aero device, moveable by the driver. I think that means that left on their own without policing on this the moveable rear wing could be harness to affect all kinds of things on the car, not just the stalling out of the front wing, but air could be redirected under the car, around the sidepods, at the diffuser etc etc, all with ‘inexpensive’ tubes meant to play with the air. It’s not about the tubes themselves as Brawn makes it sound. It’s about the science involved and to me about affecting other parts of the car with a device controlled by the driver.

            Anyway, perhaps it is moot because it is not like Mercedes is dominating because of some advantage that the F-duct is providing. I know that was the initial concern, but they have hardly translated it into something copy-worthy, other than for Lotus it seems.

  12. So is the negotiating point for Lewis for all trophies from past wins or just wins after negotiations are settled?

    Lewis was raised by Macca and he knows the rules. If I were Dennis I’d counter with “Sure Lewis I’ll give you the trophies but you have to drop by my house on your day off and wash my car.”

    1. Or get Bottas instead.

  13. The people who think the regulations should be a lot more open. Maybe even unrestricted should go back & look at whats happened to other series that tried that.

    Group B resulted in cars that were far too quick & far too dangerous to race.

    Can-Am ended up much the same, The cars quickly became too fast for the circuits they were racing on, Cost’s went up massively & a number of teams left as they could not afford to continue, Not could they afford to compete with the top teams.

    Restriction of the regulations is necisary not just to keep cost’s at sensible levels but also to prevent cars been developed that are simply too fast for the circuits.

    1. But the F1 regs are too restricted; as Newey once said, all the teams do is come up with slightly different variants of the same design; the cars essentialy all become identical, and there are no new ideas coming through.

      1. Sounds like club racing to me… James Hunt once denounced CART racing in America for as just that, and he was right. F1 has been slowly moving that way for many years.

        1. Whilst I edit as I type I’m working with a Toshiba note book that has a Norwegian keyboard and a serious problem with the cursor jumping around as I type. Hence sentences often come out as …. rdwell, wei as I type. Apologies to all readers.

          1. Meaning the “for and as mix up”

          2. Of course Newey is going to wish for new ideas that seperate one car from another…that’s what he does…but he is not in charge of the team’s expenditures and those of the other teams. So sure it would be cool if some teams used fenders on their cars for example, or we were back to all the little carbon bits affecting the air around the car, or exclusively-for-qualifying wings or engines or gearboxes, but it all gets out of hand and becomes a game of money and resources, leaving all lesser teams without a chance.

            And ok I get that we don’t want generic cars out there with no differences between them. But there has to be a balance between what Adrian Newey would like, and what is reasonable and sustainable and allows lesser teams to enter F1 and be competitive before the owners decide it’s good money after bad. Spending in the past has been over the top, bordering on obscene.

            And at least as restrictive as the rules are now they are still doing tons of R&D into fuel economy, KERS reliability, smaller than ever gearboxes that allow the cars to be more coke-bottle than ever, efficient wings, exhaust/diffuser work, tire/setup knowledge to get more out of the tires than the other teams, notched noses vs. smooth ones, push or pull rod suspensions, weight savings, brake cooling etc etc.

            Who knows…maybe they could get to a point where the teams all agree to a cap, they figure out how to police it, and it means the teams can innovate to the point where some cars look more different than others eg. let’s say some use ‘fenders’ for aero benefits. How long before they all use them, as the teams are not going to just sit on their hands and watch a major innovation/benefit go unanswered?

          3. Just another little thought on the reference to ‘club racing’ that comes when a series isn’t allowed to innovate like F1 has been able to in the past. The upside of that is it becomes more about the driver and not just about the team with the most money and resources, or the team with the best ‘Newey’.

            I know F1 wants to be the pinnacle of racing, but I think this year’s closeness (read ‘genericness’) appears to be more appealing than seeing a team with a special handle on a special innovation running away with the WDC and sealing it up with 6 races to go. Naturally Newey would rather have it the way it was last year than this…but what about the fans?

          4. Turn off the touch pad while you type, should fix it!

          5. There is a middle ground here, and though I rarely see it spoken, Ill try to do so here.

            1. Remove ALL technical restrictions except those that affect driver safety. This includes the crash tests, engine power, and fire contingencies

            2. Impose a spending cap for the creation of the car, but have no cap for non-racing activities. Spend as much as you want on hospitality, and motorhomes, but any device that plays a role in Race Operations, must be paid from the capped fund

            3. Employ an impartical party to audit the race operations spending, look closely for abuses, and have the FIA impose EXTREME penalities for moderate breaches.

            4. Fix the max cap at something on the lower end of the scale so existing poor teams can afford it, then FOTA votes to readjust every year or so.

            This helps many things
            A. New teams know what they are getting into, and there is a fixed target for funding. Existing teams also get a benefit in that the “Hunt for Sponsors” now has an end-goal rather than the current state “where more is never enough”.

            B. Innovation is allowed to roam free, rewarded because money cant buy every great idea, and good ideas can come from even a lowly paid designer. This will mean that teams may be able to develop a working design year on year. Today, they have to scrap each car at the end because of rule changes etc… Some teams will have rebuilding years where they get it all wrong and have to redesign, but F1 is not supposed to be easy.

            C. Teams can still Wine and Dine at will, Rich guys get caviar and champagne, while the poor brethern get by on fizzy-drink and crisps. On the surface, the natural elevation of the victorious is maintained, and the losers still look like losers in the paddock.

    2. The simplest way to limit speeds is to limit the overal power the engines develop, which should come more into affect with the fuel-flow restrictions on the 1.6’s.

      1. But that means teams spend a fortune going faster using aero, and we just have a slower F1.

  14. Time has changed, and sport is influenced too much by all the wrong people.

    What F1 needs, is another Bernie, who is going to put foot down and tell everyone involved how it’s going to happen.

    Now it is like in that old moral story, where different animals pulling the cart in different directions and hardly anything happens.

    With teams and sponsors having more and more influence even if Bernie still have some of his instincts left, he is forced to please the stakeholders. No wonder he wants to cash in and get out of this circus.

  15. I’m undecided about Hamilton and his trophies. On the one hand, they’re his, he earned them so he should be able to do as he see fits (perhaps even choosing to keep them in a cabinet in Woking), it seems a bit weak that Ron Dennis considers them morale boosters. These are professional employees, decent results and a salary should be enough motivation. However, on the other hand, if that’s McLaren’s policy then it should be respected, it’s not like Lewis is home that much to be able to enjoy them.

    Double DRS doesn’t strike me as a big loss, though I’m hearing that McLaren may be looking into it for later in the year. Mercedes rarely took advantage of it and Lotus, as strong as they are, don’t seem to be able to grab that all important pole position.

  16. Thanks for the COTD….I must admit that form time to time I go mad at how the Pirelli product affects results on sunday and at times I do enjoy the effects of their product. Must have taken my better mood pill when I wrote this….TED BELL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.