http://images01.plus613.net/b/c/b/c/www_plus613_net_tmp2009Formula1racingcars.jp g

the new cars look good 

GP wins will decide world title

F1 Drivers Association voted against it, but Ecclestone has passed it. 

From the two main things in that article 1) GP wins will decide word title; and 2) the budget cap of £30m; the second one is the one that I personally don't like.

The GP wins, as the article and Ecclestone think, might produce more interesting racing. The only problem I see, also as the article says, is that the championship can be decided well in advance, and in fact only a few times it will be decided on the last race. So the last couple of races of a championship won't be very interesting. My prediction is that that sort of system won't last more than two seasons. It would be good to make a longer championship though.

The second point is the one that worries me. In my opinion (I might be completely off here) the main attraction of Formula One is precisely that car and engine manufacturers can throw as much money as they can to try an produce the fastest car. This is what makes F1 different from other open wheel championships or categories. F1s are cars that often push the envelope in car design and technology. Limiting the budget isn't limiting this advance? I think a better way to do it is to change the rules as they have been doing in the last few seasons. Like only one engine for a number of races, progressively increasing that number of races, or the amount of tyres they can use per weekend; they can even limit the amount of fuel they can use, to see if teams can come with more fuel efficient cars. Am I being naive here?

Now the fact that Ecclestone does what he wants ignoring F1 Drivers Association decisions is not new, and everyone, him and the teams/drivers are just pushing what they think is best for them. 

The reason for limiting spending is to try and make it more like racing, and less like what it is at the moment, which is 18 cars all doing time trials for the large part. Otherwise it could end up facing the same problems as touring cars, because not all the companies are going to be able to afford to through money at it. 

Yeah, I understand what you mean, and I think you are right midge. They need to find a way to reduce the success difference between the rich teams and the not-so-rich ones. But is imposing a budget cap the way to do it? 

I don't expect it to succeed. The budget is (apparently) on the production cost side, and not on the development side. The top teams spend ridiculous amounts on development, and they always will. 

Jean Todt leaves Ferrari, leaving no ties in the company what-so-ever. Thoughts? 

Maybe he'll take over for Mosley soon. There were rumors of that some time back.

Or maybe he just wants to retire and bang Michelle Yeoh. He is in his mid 60's. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7955790.stm

They've dumped the new points system for 2009 and will implement it in 2010. 

Personally I think it was a crazy idea. If going for the win became everything it would probably encourage more nasty team tactics and some dangerous overtaking.

I like the points system the wasy it has been for the last several years, something that encourages consistant finishing, rather than number of wins etc.

Also, and I confess I never read the whole proposal, in a "win orientated" championchip, what would the 3rd tier teams have to aspire to? 

It's been dropped then?

Sounds more and more like it's just something dreamt up to allow Bernie to flex his control over the sport and to get some publicity. 

Glueshooter said:

A little later than I anticipated but I've set up a Fazed Fantasy F1 league at this place..

http://www.fantasy-f1.net/home/goHomePage.do

It's free to play and you have to register but I've been playing on the site for a few years and have had no problems at all. You can create up to 10 teams ( although you can only have 3 in the league) and it's the normal: choose drivers, test drivers, chassis and engine for £55 milllion. After each race you can make (I think) up to 3 changes and you get extra cash for performance so you can upgrade.

The league is called Fazed F1
The password is pihb
You can only enter 3 teams in the league and once a team is entered in the league it cannot leave. So if you enter 3 crap teams then tough!!
It's all mostly self explanatory seeing as most people here are pretty 'net-savvy and the help guides are quite good. You can set a team up reasonably quickly or you can take as long as you want and if you have any extra queries, just ask.

Good luck.

Bump 

I had a dream last night that minardi won the first grand prix of the season,
even though they don;t even exist anymore.
i can't believe i'm dreaming of minardi. 

A protest has been lodged against the cars of three teams on the eve of the season-opening Australian Grand Prix.

Ferrari, BMW Sauber, Renault and Red Bull claim the cars of Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams have illegal parts that give them an unfair advantage.

This could also read......

Ferrari, BMW Sauber, Renault and Red Bull protest over the validity of the Brawn, Toyota and Williams diffusers because they didn't think of the idea first.

 

Interesting. Noticed that McLaren are keeping their nose clean so far this year, while everyone else is getting involved. Wonder if this is a regime change.

Bernie claims there will be three new F1 teams next year, and that the medal rule change will definitely be in place. I wonder if he is saying this to attract more people, because he realises that he's going to lose teams this year. 

I can see where the appeal is coming from - if the regulation assumes that the actual body will be horizontal too (along with the top of the diffuser) and there's a reason for it (to promote overtaking/increase safety for following cars) then doing something innovative could be taken as going against the spirit of the regulations.

However I'm all for something like this if it doesn't prove to have any safety issues, just like I was with Ferrari's "kind of moveable bodyparts" thing. 

The medal rule is bollocks and Ecclestone comparing F1 to the 100m sprint is, frankyl, trite. This decade of F1 has seen the closest racing in the history of the sport even with Schumachers for half of it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it....even Massa has spoken out against any points changes, claiming consistency over outright speed is an important part of the sport. 

Totally failed in my post there....

The medal rule is bollocks and Ecclestone comparing F1 to the 100m sprint is, frankly, trite. This decade of F1 has seen the closest racing in the history of the sport even with Schumachers domination for half of it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it....even Massa has spoken out against any points changes, claiming consistency over outright speed is an important part of the sport.

 

Holy cow:

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2009/03/24/mclaren-and-renault-boycott-avoided/

This is srs bsns. 

F1 is starting to sound more like a soap opera. 

The photo of Bernie Burns on that pages is pure hilarity. 

haha indeed 

Diffusers given the go ahead by race stewards 

Glueshooter said:

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/3/8987.html

Out of all the teams on the grid this year, I really hope this one has some success.

Well, Brawn GP have started on the right track then.
Both cars, front row for the Australian GP. 

I, for one, will be watching this season in earnest.
Nothing like a good shakeup of the old order to reignite interest. 

Just watched the repeat of the qualifying, awesome stuff! Toyota were unlucky with the diffuser thing, and Hamilton must be gutted.

The race is on at 5AM uk time, so I won't be looking in this thread until I watch the repeat at midday. :D 

Oh, bastard. I accidentally just read what happened in the race, it's not on TV for another two hours yet.

Stupid Guardian frontpage, post a spoiler warning next time!!! 

yes! the have The Chain as the theme music again!!!! 

I think that was a good F1 weekend. It was good to see different guys in the podium, even if one of them (Trulli) didn't last long in 3rd place.
Now the question is, would Brawn GP be a real contender this year? I hope they are. 

crazy finish to the season opener. 

Maqroll said:

Now the question is, would Brawn GP be a real contender this year? I hope they are.

I hope they are too, and don't see any reason yet why they wouldn't be.
I don't think they'll dominate all year like they did in Australia.
Other teams will settle into the new rules and equipment and perform better than this weekend,
and they presumably only managed a 1-2 thanks to Kubica and Vettel's mess.
There's no arguing that Brawn came flying out of the gate, though, and more power to them.

Incidentally, I disagree with Vettel's 10 spot penalty for Malaysia.
I thought it looked like Kubica cut him off way too sharp, leaving him nowhere to go,
rather more like something I would expect from last year's Hamilton.
Shame, because Kubica might could've won the race otherwise.

Speaking of: solid, uneventful race for Hamilton, for all the talk of their car having design flaws, and him starting so far back.
I know the safety cars helped him make up a lot of that, but credit where it's due - he drove like a pro;
nothing flashy, nothing noteworthy, just a businesslike climb through the ranks.

So far I like this new anybody's-guess-what-may-happen season.
Also, Bernie should be cockslapped for making them race at that time of day. 

Incidentally, I disagree with Vettel's 10 spot penalty for Malaysia.
[...]
Shame, because Kubica might could've won the race otherwise.

I think that Kubica was clearly superior and, as you said, he could have won the race. That might be the reason for the penalty. Vettel went too far and hit Kubica.

Speaking of: solid, uneventful race for Hamilton, for all the talk of their car having design flaws, and him starting so far back.
I know the safety cars helped him make up a lot of that, but credit where it's due - he drove like a pro;
nothing flashy, nothing noteworthy, just a businesslike climb through the ranks.

Yes, agreed. That shows the quality of driver he is. Of course a good car helps, but this shows that a good driver doesn't need the best car to get good results.

So far I like this new anybody's-guess-what-may-happen season.

Hell yeah! 

Also, Bernie should be cockslapped for making them race at that time of day.

what was the local time? 

Start was 5pm Australian time. Bernie wanted it to be a night race (so as to be more convenient for the European television crowd), but the Australian group that manages the track wouldn't pay for lighting, since they apparently lose a bunch of money on the race as is*, so they settled on 5pm.

This time of year, though, that means that the drivers were getting a lot of sun in their eyes, followed by a lot of shadow, because of all the trees, etc, around the track. Was very dangerous for them. 

Oh, I forgot my *

* it seems like everyone who hosts a race loses a bunch of money on it. Why do they host them? The prestige? And why can't they find a way to make it profitable? Bernie should guarantee them enough of the broadcast profits to make up for any loss they incur, so he still has a sport. 

it costs enough to get tickets, and the attendances are pretty large. Must be really expensive 

McLaren stripped of all points & places in Aussie GP

hahahahaha 

shit man, haha 

I never saw the pass, but if Hamilton slowed down and pulled to the side (I assume that's how drivers signal to each other that they are conceding a place) then you can't really say that Trulli's done anything wrong.

Makes me wonder what the communication between team and driver was though. If there was nothing dodgy about it then it would have been better Hamilton just getting 4th back again. 

nothing dodgy and Mclaren don't usually go hand in hand. 

I don't think the pass was shown on TV ( although I could be wrong).

McLaren are shit at breaking the rules. 

Yeah, they really are.

I didn't see it on TV either.

Surely there is more to it, seems harsh. 

I still don't understand exactly what McLaren are alleged to have done. Can someone clarify in plain English? 

Trulli had a small spin just after the safety car was sent out, and Hamilton overtook. Then, Trulli passed Hamilton under the safety car - it appeared that Hamilton was conceding the place as the initial pass had been under the flag.

Trulli finishes 3rd, Hamilton finishes 4th. McLaren appeal the places saying that when Trulli passed Hamilton he was overtaking under the safety car. Trulli gets a 25 second penalty, Hamilton gets 3rd. Toyota don't appeal (I'm not sure if you can actually appeal the sort of penalty he got).

The stewards then find out that McLaren never released their full radio communications (which they are meant to do). These communications haven't been made public, but something in the communication between McLaren and Hamilton suggested that McLaren intentionally withheld the radio chatter because it would harm or defeat their case.

This was deemed to be against the rules and so the driver was disqualified and the points wiped. 

Right, thanks Midge. I wish the BBC would make their version as plain English as yours! Makes sense ...

... you do have to wonder why (and how) race stewards can give Trulli the penalty without looking at all the facts first. Sure, McLaren may well be in the wrong, but jeez, the FIA really aren't doing themselves any favours already this season - looks like this year might well be as shambolic as last :) 

as one of the comments on 606 said earlier...

Why bother getting up at 5am to watch the race when you can get the final positions
later on in the week after all the teams and stewards complaints have been dealt with?

 

DAWG UK said:

... you do have to wonder why (and how) race stewards can give Trulli the penalty without looking at all the facts first.

From the sounds of it, the teams have to hand over any communications with the driver, but it must be the responsibility of the team to do so. You'd think there was a way for the stewards to record everything communicated by every team, but then there could be the suggestion of other people listening in. 

They already made the decision post-race, if they took a day or two longer, I imagine that it wouldn't have made any difference to anybody. Their slapdash approach towards making decisions that are potentially very financially damaging to individuals and companies, is horrifying really. 

Martin Whitmarsh (McLaren) interview 

It's one of the most leading "interviews" i have ever read, not least of all because of the double negatives used in a couple of questions, attempting to get Whitmarsh to admit to something that might not be true.