Double points “not destroying Formula One” – Todt

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Start, Yas Marina, 2013In the round-up: Jean Todt continues to defend the widely condemned plan for double points in the last race of the season.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Todt: Revamp will save F1 (The Telegraph)

“Todt says, on the contrary, that double points is ‘100 per cent not destroying Formula One’, and instead encourages the rule’s critics to ‘make a proposal’.”

Jenson Button interview: ‘It’s when you are away from racing that it hits you like a stake through the heart’ (The Independent)

“Somebody wrote me a nice message which said, ‘Everyone else’s lives will go back to normal but it won’t for you. But never feel guilty about having a laugh or a smile because that’s what he’d want.’ That was a lovely message. But it’s when you are away from racing or from people, that’s when it hurts. It hits you like a stake through the heart.”

Porsche could have been forced into F1 (Autosport)

“Incoming Porsche chairman Matthias Muller and other senior company personnel openly talked about a F1 return in autumn 2010 at a time when it was in the process of making its decision.”

Kimi and Fernando at the 059/3 premiere (Ferrari)

Kimi Raikkonen: “As for the others? I don’t fear them and even if anyone’s quicker than us we are only at the first race.”

Fernando Alonso: “Every new season you think you can do well…” (Adam Cooper’s F1 Blog)

“It’s not like other years when you arrive here and you have a more ambitious target, I think this year everyone is more calm and everyone is a little bit more cautious about the possibility of finishing the race.”

‘People don’t know what I’m capable of’ (ESPN)

Daniel Ricciardo: “There’s a bit more, for sure, since Mark [Webber] stepped aside and I’ve moved up. I think everyone’s curious, along with me, to see how I go. A lot of people don’t really know what I’m capable of so it’s curiosity for now. Seb’s been so dominant so people are asking ‘can this kid really take it to him?’.”

Grand prix stress ‘may harm swans’ (The Age)

“[Professor] Mulder’s concern is especially for the younger birds being exposed to about 100 decibels, the noise level 100 metres from the track.”

New technological challenges (MotorSport)

John Surtees: “A top team would have something like 10 sets of earpieces for each driver every year, which would normally cost £300 per set. However, with the new regulations and specification required that figure will now be something like £1600 per set. I suppose there will also be a question mark over how reliable these sensors are and how useful the information provided will be. But I suppose that if you use the word ‘safety’ no one can argue.”

10 cars that changed Formula One (CNN)

“The 64 years of F1 history have been marked by moments of design genius which have changed the elite motorsport, at least until the next maverick idea came along.”

Australian Grand Prix Betting: Ferrari & Williams Can Challenge Mercedes (Unibet)

My Australian Grand Prix preview for Unibet.


Comment of the day

Are the new qualifying rules a change for the better?

First of all, this is a great example of the FIA overcomplicating things to make their vision work. It would be better to remove the ‘start on the set of tyres you qualified on’ altogether, but instead they insist on making things even more confusing than they already are.

Secondly, the new rules will move the problem from Q3 to Q2: the midfield teams will not want to risk running too fast in case they might have to start on a scrub set of tyres. The frontrunner teams will do their utmost best to only just make it into Q3, so they have the best tyres as possible at the start of the race. As a result, the first 13 minutes of Q2 will see no running at all, while the last 2 minutes will see all drivers running.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Armen, Pabs and Starosta!

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

Sebastian Vettel got his 2010 world championship campaign off to the best possible start by claiming pole position for the Bahrain Grand Prix ahead of the two Ferraris.

Image © Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free


78 comments on Double points “not destroying Formula One” – Todt

  1. JackySteeg (@jackysteeg) said on 13th March 2014, 1:47

    “Revamp will save F1″? From what exactly? If anything is killing Formula 1 it’s these daft rules the clowns in charge keep coming up with.

    • mantresx (@mantresx) said on 13th March 2014, 6:46

      @jackysteeg Hehe you’re right, if there’s less people watching and going to races it surely can’t be all thanks to Vettel domination, going to countries where no one knows what F1 is, confusing amount of pitstops, pay TV model, rising ticket prices, I’m sure all those things put together have contributed far more to the decrease in viewership.
      If anything F1 needs to be saved from Bernie, who is the sole responsible for all the problems I just listed.

  2. Paul (@frankjaeger) said on 13th March 2014, 1:50

    Is that tweet from the same guy writes that horribly intrusive blog about Schumacher? I really don’t understand that guy and what he thinks Michael owes to him.

    • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 13th March 2014, 13:52

      That guy is Gary Hartstein, former F1 doctor, and medical expert. His blog isn’t horribly intrusive, it’s written from the position of a medical expert and gives a rare bit of clear information on the nature of the kind of brain injury which Schumacher has sustained.

      It’s remarkable that this is such a common situation and yet one which is so poorly reported around the world, to the point that brain injuries still seem very mysterious and misunderstood by the public. Who of course aren’t helped by the traditional media portrayal of the person awaking from a lengthy coma and then resuming their normal life. Hartstein is actually speaking candidly about the reality of serious brain injuries, in an incredibly informative manner. Far from the usual media speculation and fabrication with no real genuine information, his blog posts are full of detailed medical information which allows the reader to get a better understanding of the situation, while at the same time trying to cut through the massive volume of media speculation and misinformation floating around.

      His criticism is simply that there is no information coming through; something which seems to point increasingly to the likelihood that Schumacher isn’t really making any significant progress. After all, if he was making good progress and showing signs that a recovery was even possible, why would they deliberately withold that information from Schumacher’s millions of fans?

      • evered7 (@evered7) said on 13th March 2014, 15:18

        What if they don’t give a ‘f’ about the millions of fans? It is their family and it is up to them to disclose any information that they deem fit.

        They might have a million reasons to not fully disclose the situation. All I am saying is Gary isn’t around Schumi to make a valid statement no matter what his qualifications are.

        To Gary –> Just because you are an SME on a topic doesn’t mean you need to counter everything that is said on the subject. This is a sensitive situation about an individual and not a study. Gary needs to know that.

        • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 13th March 2014, 15:37

          Well, firstly he IS in a position to make a valid statement, in terms of generally giving a good, concise picture of what is the very likely situation.

          Secondly, I don’t really understand why you’re upset about what he’s saying. Look at it this way – if he’s wrong and Schumacher is making good, steady progress, then why would his words cause genuine hurt to anyone? If he’s right, then the doctors will already have told Schumacher’s family exactly what he’s said.

          In fact, if Schumacher’s family found ongoing speculation (even speculation from a position of a medical expert) to be hurtful, then the best thing they could possibly do is be open about the situation and remove the need for speculation. In fact, what they’ve said is that they won’t give any updates unless there is something meaningful to update on. We had an update from the doctors about a week ago saying that his condition was unchanged. Hartstein’s position is that at this point if Schumacher hasn’t showed any significant progress, then it’s looking increasingly unlikely that Schumacher will ever regain consciousness. This is a totally logical position informed by medical expertise and decades of experience. I appreciate it’s an incredibly, almost unendurably hard thing for Schumacher’s family to have to deal with. But reality is what it is; they won’t be being protected from that reality by the doctors, and even if they were, ignorance will do nothing to change the situation.

          I have infinitely more time for Hartstein than I do for any number of tabloid hacks who are prepared to make up basically anything just for the sake of appearing to have a scoop. That is far more damaging I think than a medical professional giving his informed opinion which, in a lot of regards, directly debunks a lot of the misinformation and outright fiction being put forward by most media outlets.

  3. schooner (@schooner) said on 13th March 2014, 2:04

    I’m sure the swans that live in Albert Park will be just fine. They’re not exactly an endangered species (at least not where I live), and this year’s race weekend will be a lot easier on their little ears anyway. Of more concern might be the endangered race fans who find themselves unable to afford tickets.

  4. Maciek (@maciek) said on 13th March 2014, 2:41

    There are many things that bother me about Jean Todt, but certainly none more so than the fact he’s married to Michelle Yeoh. Surely, no other proof is necessary of his pact with the devil.

  5. Maciek (@maciek) said on 13th March 2014, 2:54

    And… so long I have searched the remote corners of my memory and now I’ve finally clicked on why F1 rule amendments seem so familiar: the FIA obviously was the real brains behind 43-Man Squamish.

  6. Spencer Ward (@sward28) said on 13th March 2014, 2:57

    Is it just me or does Max Chilton look really, really frail this year? I know guys are trying to lose weight but…….yikes!

  7. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 13th March 2014, 3:13

    Master Yoda doesn’t sound very wise.

  8. evered7 (@evered7) said on 13th March 2014, 5:34

    Gary Hartstein has probably not heard of the saying ‘Don’t say anything if you don’t have anything nice to say’.

    I don’t care what information is passed to the outside world from the Schumacher family. All I want is for him to recover from his illness. If they want to keep the news in wraps till he is fully recovered, I am all for it.

    One must question Gary if he will be happy with a spotlight focused on his bedroom maybe, to make him understand how bad it is to intrude on other’s privacy. Can’t help but feel he is seeking publicity out of this tragic event.

    • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 13th March 2014, 8:18

      I’m beginning to understand why Hartstein was kicked out as the F1 doctor.

      • evered7 (@evered7) said on 13th March 2014, 13:17

        I think the best way to stop him will be to ignore him. I request F1 Fanatic not to use him as a source of info on the Schumacher story.

        I think the fans will be willing to stay ignorant until the family decides to release all the news, be it +ve or -ve.

        I am hoping we will get to hear from Schumi himself soon.

        • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 13th March 2014, 13:58

          I for one have no desire to remain ignorant to the reality of serious brain injury. Having lost a friend last year to a situation causing serious brain damage, it’s something I feel that people should have a better understanding of. Seeing my friend’s family go through the agonising process of having to learn that life is nor like the movies and TV shows where a person with a serious brain injury can miraculously wake up and be the same person they were before.

          I understand why people find this hard to accept – it isn’t a comforting thought. I feel that what a lot of people talk about as being an invasion of privacy actually upsets them because it’s a harsh reality which is difficult to accept and makes it hard for them to cling to the idea that Michael Schumacher will one day be the man he was before the accident.

          Hartstein’s conclusion is a logical one. Either Schumacher isn’t making progress, or he is making progress and the family and doctors are deliberately witholding that. Which would seem like one of the cruellest comms strategies in history.

  9. bag0 (@bag0) said on 13th March 2014, 8:48

    Someone should point out to Monsieur Todt, that if the president of the FIA have to publicly defend a rule change, that shows, there is something wrong with it. But history shows that the FIA realy does not care about the criticism, and if they realize the problems they don’t really solve it, just apply another change, that creates others. The main problem is, that the fundamental flaw of the rules could not be covered with anything, and a bigger one is, the FIA is not capable of realizing this.

  10. Mike Dee (@mike-dee) said on 13th March 2014, 9:47

    On the accelerometers in the ear pieces: Why? Why not in the helmet, where there is more space?

  11. Thecollaroyboys (@thecollaroyboys) said on 13th March 2014, 9:51

    The Age story is just a scam to drive traffic to their site. It’s just so ludicrous you have to click it. Resist the urge ladies and gentlemen.

  12. Ian Wilkins (@capt-wilko) said on 13th March 2014, 11:10

    How will they define the success of the double points rule?

    Will it be a success if the double points makes no difference to the championship either because the title is wrapped up before the last race or the leader wins anyway. Or will it be a success if the title is turned on its head and someone else wins the title solely because there is double points? One scenario means the rule is irrelevant , the other means it’s a travesty.

    • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 13th March 2014, 12:31

      I guess they’ll consider it a success if ‘fans’ don’t spend the bum end of the season whinging ceaselessly about the championship being boring and claiming they won’t watch races after the championship has been decided.

      Those people are the ones responsible for this horrendous decision.

    • petebaldwin (@petebaldwin) said on 13th March 2014, 14:29

      There is only one situation I can think of where this would could be considered, by some (FIA), to be a success.

      Firstly, the winner has to be the same with double points as it would be without. If someone wins purely because of double points, it’s going to cause huge problems. I wouldn’t view someone as champion if their win is solely down to double points. If you think the F1 community is kicking up a fuss now, wait until someone lose the championship because of this rule!

      Secondly, the WDC would need to have been over before the final race if it wasn’t for double points. If that doesn’t happen, it won’t have made any difference and therefore, was irrelevant and can’t be considered a success or a faliure.

      Thirdly, the final race has to be exciting. If someone winning a mind-blowing race at Brazil would have won them the WDC but instead, it gets carried over to Abu Dhabi where the championship is won by a retirement or a dull lights to flag win, you’ve robbed F1 of an amazing moment and have replaced it will a dull, boring one.

      In effect, the only way for this to be successful is if it extends the title to the final race but doesn’t effect who wins it and if Abu Dhabi provides a better race then where the title would have been won without double points.

  13. petebaldwin (@petebaldwin) said on 13th March 2014, 13:11

    Interesting story on another site – apparently a lot of the teams are planning on not running in FP3 because they won’t have a chance to fix any issues in the 2 hours they have before Q1.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 13th March 2014, 13:40

      That’l drive Bernie up the wall, and unfortunately I can see why that will be very bad for F1, if that practice session has been sold to TV stations around the world and no car runs, that could be the end of televised practice in a lot of markets. I’m torn between the schadenfreude of Bernie and Jean screwing up again so visibly because they don’t take the time to think things through from the participants and fans viewpoint, and the worry that there will be less, not more F1 TV coverage in future. @petebaldwin

      • petebaldwin (@petebaldwin) said on 13th March 2014, 14:41

        @hohum – I know what you mean… I suppose the easy solution is to push FP3 an hour earlier and Q1 an hour later so the teams have 4 hours to work on the car between sessions.

        Personally, the best thing for the sport would be wholesale changes in the way the FIA work and for Bernie to leave for good so publicly screwing up in this way can only be a good thing (if it happens)!

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.