F1 News & Discussions > General F1 Discussion
Hamilton Speaks Out on the State of F1
cosworth151:
I started to post this in the What's Wrong with F1 thread, but there's enough other stuff here that it rates its own thread. I think he makes a lot of sense in his ideas about F1's problems. Whether you like or dislike him, I think most of you will agree with him that Toto Wolff should not be the next head of the sport.
https://racer.com/2019/06/27/medland-the-real-reason-f1-needs-lewis-hamilton-right-now/
Jericoke:
So who SHOULD be in charge of F1 (I sort of like Max's idea of a 'dictator')?
Maybe a former driver?
I don't see Alonso doing it, but maybe Prost? I think Kimi would be great at it, but can't imagine him wanting the job either.
Scott:
I'm not sure a driver is equipped to be in charge of the sport, and as Lewis mentioned, anyone previously part of a team cannot be completely objective (Jean Todt?), it's simply human nature.
I think a superfan with a strong technical and racing background would be the best choice (who choses?). I vote for Alia. :D :D
First of all, F1 should decide what it's primary goal is going to be. Is it exposure and profitability (as opposed to just viability like it appears to be these days)? Competitive racing? Technical innovation?
I think it would need to be a combination of those things and the leader would need to be an expert or at the very least, expertly advised and able to make critical decisions.
I do agree that it should not be a democracy. The teams should be presented with the rules before they are accepted into the series. It should be economically painful for them to be part of it, and even more painful for them to leave. And if they must leave, then the series should make it less complicated for a new owner to take over (naming and profit sharing rules are stupid). On the economic side of things, F1 should not be owned by a corporation. It should be an equal share owned by each team and a certain amount by the FIA. This is the biggest problem Bernie caused imo...he arranged it so FOM had too much value (greedy little man), and brought corporations and shareholders into the picture, who rightly demand a return. FOM should never have been anything but a subsidy of the series empowered to negotiate races, advertising and broadcast rights, but without taking direct profit. The profits should have gone entirely back to the series itself (the teams and handsome budget for the FIA). The teams allowed it to happen at a time when the sport could have evolved into a much more profitable direction simply because Bernie convinced them to cede control to him in trade for quick easy profits. Another example of why it should not be a democracy.
Not being a democracy should also mean no favouritism. No legacy payments (sorry Ferrari)...all teams on equal footing and profit sharing.
I liked what Lewis had to say about regulation freezes (get rid of them). Why should teams and fans have to wait 5 years for another overhaul? To save money? Come on...any respectable company knows how to get into the black, and that is to choose itself where and when to cut costs, not have that dictated by the FIA. I know this goes back to the circle of big teams vs little teams vs costs and viability, but it hasn't been sensible, and the big teams will always find ways to spend more money, so if profits are balanced across the teams with a healthy purse to supplement the winners and punish the losers, teams will be self motivated to save money in some areas and then pour more into R&D that they can manage themselves.
That's probably enough for now...
lkjohnson1950:
I'm not going to address money. The biggest reason F1 is the way it is is too much down force in the wrong places. They depend on the front wing for front grip and anything that interferes with the airflow reduces front grip and causes understeer. You can't follow the car in front closely enough to make a real slipstream pass. Hence DRS, which either doesn't work at all or works too well. Racing in the US' three major series (Indy Car, NASCAR, and IMSA) improved when those series reduced the effect of the front wings or splitters. F1 needs to reduce the front wings and do away with all the barge boards, vortex generators etc. They won't though because the teams want that stuff. Too bad for F1.
cosworth151:
There have been many cases where having a "dictator" for a racing series (or other sports league) have worked very well. Tony Hulman at USAC/Indy, Bill France Sr at NASCAR, Wally Parks at the NHRA, Don Panoz at IMSA. Even Bernie in his earlier years at F1.
NASCAR is a little farther along the descent than F1 for many of the same reasons. They're at the point where they are running in front of mostly empty grandstands & plummeting TV viewership. It happened because they dropped great venues for a bunch of BCC (Boring Charlotte Clone) tracks at "destination" cities, cookie cutter cars and incomprehensible rules (the infamous Race to the Chase for the Cup for the Thing).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version