Grand Prix 2018 United States Grand Prix Practice, Qualifying & Race Discussion

Il_leone

Champion Elect
Izumi No one kicked up a fuss because Red Bull were not big players except for when it came to voting you got two votes instead of one to the favoured side and always at the detriment of the B team

Williams and Force India have managed to argue that Toro Rosso must produce its own chassis which is as far as it got in terms of parity

Haas come along and say we'l just buy off Ferrari everything and are at the midfield with suspicion its an old ferrari chassis under the cover according to the conspiracy theorists

The biggest issue is the money side am afraid Ferrari are allowed $50m in royalty payments which is more than some teams get in constructors money ! Then you have this situation where the constructors money can only be paid out if the team manages to complete the full season after that to avoid money laundering
 

Galahad

Not a Moderator
Valued Member
I was interested to read, after Austin, that Kimi is only the seventh different driver to win a GP in the hybrid era - a period that now stretches to 97 races.

This made me wonder how this compares with previous periods of F1 history. The below chart shows the trend of how many different winners there have been in the previous 100 races (a rolling 100 races; not including the Indy 500s of 1950-60):
Different drivers_100.jpg


So, perhaps unsurprisingly, we are in the midst of the period with the fewest different winners. Prior to Austin, there had been only six in the previous 100 races: Hamilton, Rosberg, Vettel, Ricciardo, Verstappen and Bottas.

Prior to 2014, and for most of the 2000s, there were between 10-15 different winners. The previous low point came in the early 1990s, with fewer than 10 for a period in 1991-93, including a sequence of eight races in 1992 when there were only eight: Piquet, Senna, Prost, Mansell, Berger, Boutsen, Nannini and Patrese.

The record came in the mid-1970s - no surprise. When James Hunt won the 1975 Dutch Grand Prix at Zandvoort, he was the 25th different driver to have won in the preceding 100 events. It is worth noting that with fewer races per season back then, that covered a period of eight years rather than the current five. The twenty-five were: Surtees, Clark, G. Hill, McLaren, Stewart, Ickx, Siffert, Hulme, Rindt, Brabham, Rodriguez, Regazzoni, Fittipaldi, Andretti, Gethin, Cevert, Beltoise, Peterson, Revson, Reutemann, Lauda, Scheckter, Pace, Mass and Hunt.
 

Mezzer

A fine chap if ever there was one.
Contributor
Well, I am not an accountant, but I have run businesses.....so this does not seem that much of a challenge to me. You may have to require all budget to go through a single account that can be monitored by FIA, you may have to have rules about paying and evaluating the value for outside contractors, and so forth, but you only talking about oversight of 10 teams. There is enough personnel movement than any egregious violations will be quickly discovered...and it is going to take a significant financial violation to gain an advantage.
What about a "donation" of equipment or services from a sponsor in relation to advertizing on the car? You say they're intelligent enough to follow rules, I agree, but a lot of the things they are paid is to think outside of the rules ...
 

Il_leone

Champion Elect
Ruslan Its called money laundering:whistle:

Big teams with more resources will always find a way to get around this

Red Bull being a marketing company can call either their resources from taking it away from Toro Rosso and/or additional sales of their drinks
 

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
That chart from Galahad further reinforces my belief that all the hype about records being broken for wins, poles, fastest laps etc is just that, hype. It is the least competitive period in F1 and worse from a fan perspective than the Schumacher/Ferrari era.
 

The Artist.....

Champion Elect
That chart from Galahad further reinforces my belief that all the hype about records being broken for wins, poles, fastest laps etc is just that, hype. It is the least competitive period in F1 and worse from a fan perspective than the Schumacher/Ferrari era.
Whilst I agree with the sentiment of this post, I question whether it has ever really been that different. What may have changed in recent years is that “winning” teams stick with the same drivers for long periods, and individual teams keep competitive for long periods, and fluke wins have more or less been eliminated due to bullet proof reliability. If you think of “competitiveness” being measured as number of different teams capable of winning, there were only, at any given time, three teams capable of winning races...

1991-1993 - McLaren, Williams, Benetton
1994-1996 - Williams, Benetton, Ferrari ( Ligier won one race)
1997 - McLaren, Williams, Ferrari
1998-1999 - Ferrari, McLaren, Jordan (Stewart won a fluke)
 

The Artist.....

Champion Elect
My F1 experience goes back before the 90's
And mine, but it is worth thinking about why we have the current lack of variability... even in the 1980s, there were many seasons when there were very few cars capable of winning... much of the 1980s was characterised by seasons where 3 or 4 cars were capable of winning; these varied between McLaren, Ferrari, Williams, Lotus, Brabham, Benetton and Ligier.
 
Top Bottom