Talking Point: Same old, same old?

16/03/2010
NEWS STORY

While the post Bahrain criticism on forums and message boards will no doubt be put down to bleating from the usual suspects who seem to expect every race to be a recreation of Dijon 1979, the comments from the mainstream media, team bosses and drivers - including Michael Schumacher - should be enough to make the powers that be sit up and pay attention.

Bernie Ecclestone has said that there is no crisis, that there is no need to panic, however, looking at the various comments being made by some very high profile inhabitants of Planet Paddock there is every need to panic, for already, after just one round of the most keenly anticipated championship in living memory, almost everyone is unhappy and sees no improvement in the immediate future.

In recent years Pitpass has received numerous emotional e-mails from readers proclaiming that "this is it", that they'd "had enough". While some of these could be dismissed as a knee-jerk reaction to a poor race or a stewarding decision perceived as unfair, many came in the wake of the numerous scandals that have rocked the sport in recent years.

In the same way that politicians in Britain don't get it when confronted with the public's fury over issues such as the expenses scandal, F1 doesn't appear to get it when confronted by fans who say this isn't the F1 they want.

Before Sunday's bore-fest those of us of a certain age were left dewy eyed by the sight of 18 of our sport's world champions 'celebrating' the 60th anniversary of the series. I used the inverted commas deliberately, because despite the smiles the whole thing was stage managed and overly so, these legendary men merely being used to help flog the F1 brand.

Ask any of these giants of men what they thought of the 'race' that followed and I'm sure that to a man they would have told you, especially those no longer racing, those no longer forced to tow the corporate line.

18 legends forced to take part in a photo-op that more than anything rammed home the fact that Formula One - under the guidance of Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley - has sold its birthright to the highest bidder. This was a celebration that should have taken place at Silverstone, Monaco, Monza or Spa, not a sandswept desert track that has been on the calendar for the blink of an eye in front of grandstands (sparsely) populated by people who, for the most part, had no idea or appreciation of the significance of the event.

If we count Sauber as one of the new teams, of the four new teams, three failed to go the distance while the Lotus duo were both over 2 laps off the pace. While Richard Branson - who has already vowed to put the fun back in to F1 - is already declaring that 'his' team will emulate Red Bull, there is already talk that Hispania will be dead and buried before the European season gets underway.

Like the holiday you'd promised yourself, the movie you've been looking forward to for ages or that long-awaited album from your favourite band, it's proved a disappointment, a let down. And that empty feeling inside just won't go away.

Already there is talk of an extra mandatory pit stop and - God forbid - Ecclestone is already talking about his hare-brained short-cut idea again. They just don't get it.

One can come away from a football match that ended 0-0 knowing that one has just seen one of the finest games ever. There don't have to be goals galore, but there must be the possibility of scoring them.

Fans do not expect Dijon 1979 every week, but they do expect drivers to be able to at least have the wherewithal to make a move even if it only comes off on a small number of occasions.

The experts have had their time and clearly it isn't working, however, while Ecclestone and CVC control the purse-strings there is unlikely to be any serious change. This is not sport, it's not entertainment, it is a business.

We had planned on running a pre-season Talking Point, asking fans for their hopes for this much-anticipated new era. How good it is that we ran out of time, how many of us would have been left with egg on our faces after Sunday's procession.

However, now we are asking you for your opinion. Was Sunday as bad as it is being said or is the media over-reacting, hardly a rarity. Will things improve or will they get worse. Should we wait before making changes or should we make a few adjustments before Melbourne, or is it simply time for a total overhaul of the sport.

Let's hear what you think.

Chris Balfe
Editor

To send your thoughts, click here

Note: Please include your full name - without a full valid name we will not publish your entry.

Tom Gowlett

I was looking forward to seeing worn out tyres leading to differing strategies, with some drivers struggling on worn out tyres, and others gambling on getting fresh tyres. This would result in a very interesting race, every race! With Bridgestone's ultra-durable and fast long-life tyres this was not to be; we watched everyone follow the same (only) strategy.

A simple fix, in my opinion, would be to remove the hard tyre option. I really hope they don't introduce unnecessary mandatory pitstops.

Assen Koinov - Bulgaria

I am a big fan of Formula 1 since many years.

My opinion is that the races, under the present regulations, will be dull. There is not going to be any emotion when you don't see overtaking, when you don't see and expect during the race different strategies by the teams, change of strategy when a SC comes to the track, etc. We cannot expect this and the sooner the regulations are changed - the better.

What can one expect when 24 cars start with equal weight, full tanks, same power engines, same tyres, driving 5-6 sec per lap slower than qualifying? Nothing but a "train". The occasional breakdown of a car can shift positions but that's not racing. We have come to a point where Saturday qualifying is much more interesting than the race on Sunday.

Jayne Watkins

I've been an avid fan since 1976 and have attended all of the European races at some point over the years. As you can imagine spending quite a bit of money along they way. I've stuck with it throughout the so called 'boring' Schumacher years and defended it to the hilt in the pub many a time. So I think I can safely say I'm a true fan.

But this is the first time I've ever felt the need to put pen to paper, so to speak, about the state of F1. I was so bored on Sunday that I found myself reading the Sunday papers instead of watching a race that I'd looked forward to for 5 months.

I think that Bahrain has always been a boring track but with the new infield section it 's just a yawn fest. There was no discernable atmosphere at the track, I didn't even hear a cheer from the grandstands when Alonso took the chequered flag. Was this because there was hardly anyone in the grandstands?

As for the race itself, that was over after the first couple of corners. Had I been there I would have asked for my money back!

Not being a technical wizard I don't know what the answers are are far as the design of the cars is concerned. But what I don't understand is why the FIA and Ecclestone feel that they have to change the rules every bloody year and to take the races to places where they clearly have no passion for it .

Give us our sport back and leave the teams to do what they do best - to go racing...

Barry Boardman

After the first couple of laps it was obvious that the Bahrain GP was just a procession. No attempts at overtaking and what seemed to be little opportunity to overtake or more aptly 'race' . Even my wife commented that it was just the same old thing. The optimists are saying that we should wait for a couple more races but I cannot see that there will be any change. Everything seemingly has been done to dumb down the sport, to remove the spectacle and to avoid the possibility of a race. As Coulthard wrote in the Telegraph , it is the legacy of 16 years of Moseley interfering. 'Revs limited to 18,000rpm, the ban on in-race refuelling, standardised gearboxes and engines, a single tyre supplier; all initiatives introduced during his tenure at the FIA, all of which appear to have done little for the show if Bahrain is anything to go on.'

It was interesting to note that the Indy race at Sao Paulo had overtaking , the odd light brush with each other etc but at least it was watchable. If a series with similar chassis and engines can make it interesting, why can't F1 ? I don't think that I have watched a LMS or ALMS race that has not provided excellent entertainment and good racing. F1 should pay attention.

At last however some of the names in the Paddock are making comments and suggestions . It would be a shame if they are not heard over the other voices asking for patience.

Rolf Wohliche - Denmark

Sunday. Plans made to watch the race with my dad, who introduced me to F1 when I was a wee lad. Having both seen the friday and saturday practises and qualifying, we phoned each other and agreed on the same things, which are:

My god that track looks like a giant car park, where are all the people, and I hope tomorrows race won't be as Vettel predicted in the post quali press conference.

So, I drove to my dad's on Sunday, had lunch, in front of the telly (which is only done when f1 is on, otherwise we can either, wait for it to be served, or eat at the table).

Start goes off, looked good, but after 6 laps, we were looking at each other, because no one had tried anything, no one had had to change tyres, and nothing looked to be happening at all.

In short, race boring, venue boring, coverage boring. The whole thing covered in b's.....

One last note. I don't think the press has been even remotely close to overreacting on the subject.

Graham Manchester

F1 is now a two hour endurance race.

Well you asked for a comment and this is the main one really really.

None of the drivers it seemed could race due to "Saving tyres" or saving engines or saving fuel", that is NOT F1 as we knew it.

This really adds up to an endurance race and for those of us who have stopped going to Le mans for the similar reason its all just too boring.

If F1 has reached the stage where very few can compete due to financia constraints or the fact that they have gone as far as they can with development and development is strangled then let it die, something will come along to replace it but as you say its now a "Business" not a sport and for that reason I feel its finished.

If nothing more that can be done under existing rules to make them faster or safer, allow them to fly now that would be good! Moveable aerofoils, that may help.

If the late great Colin Chapman had been alive or Jim Hall entered a Chaparral, they would have found the answer as Chapman did in 1959 rear engines, 1965 monocoque, 1967 (wings) Lotus 49, Lotus and (Chaparral) 1968, 1978 airflow, and then when he became too clever with the 88 he was banned from development, that was when the rot started! That and banning the Fan car, now who was that trying to beat the systemm? Ah Mr Ecclestone I believe!

Chapman Herd or Murray would have found a cure for the current situation though that is for sure!

Too many rules (FIA and also FIM) and not enough imagination (Napoleon said "Imagination Governs the world" . Its about time it did once more!

Colin Grayson

not as bad as the press stated .....WORSE

something must be done IMMEDIATELY

how about softer tyres being used , in this race soft and super soft would have left room for strategy... 2 or 3 stops according to car and driver style ; bridgestone could adjust for this in future races

and how about pole sitter being on the dirty side so that you cannot practically guarantee that 3rd in Q3 won't have an advantage over 2nd, 5th over 4th etc , also lessen the advantage that the pole sitter gets.

Johan Godfried - The Netherlands

at this point in time, I really can't be bothered to put my thoughts in a message anymore. Nothing I have to say hasn't been said many times before. And nothing we, the fans, say will ever be taken into consideration.

It's sad really. Formula 1 is like an addiction. You KNOW no good will come from watching the race but there is no way you can stop yourself from turning on the telly and watch the 'spectacle' for 90 minutes. Afterwards you're left with an empty feeling and the hope that all will be better come next race.

I know nothing will change for the better anytime soon but my hopes drift into the opposite direction.

Paul Sixsmith

Without getting embroiled in the old F1 vs. Indy debate I would just point out that the Indy season opener in Brazil was everything that Bahrain wasn't. It may have been more like Rallycross but it was certainly entertaining from start to finish.

After 40 yearsI won't switch off F1 altogether but will probably just watch the highlights in future.

Nick Bates - Johannesburg

We are all used to BCE's very clever comments as a crisis unfolds in our favourite sport and his latest suggestion of not knee jerking is typical of a man wanting to appease his bosses.

While TV figures around the world were notably high, especially in Germany, they'll no doubt plummet as we head to the new Herman Tilke 'masterpieces' and while I will always remain a fan, if the trend does continue, I will not be aiming to watch each and every single race that I always set out to do each season and which I largely achieve.

While we all accept that BCE is nothing short of brilliant in some areas, his latest outbursts and ideas of taking shortcuts is positively insane in my opinion.

Wheel banging, locking up tyres in desperation on braking to overtake etc are the recipes that Bernie needs to add to this billion dollar cake. Using past champions to reignite the candles of the brand's cake was a cheap shot in anyone's books and for messers Piquet and Raikkonen to miss the event, albeit for different reasons, speaks volumes of the sad scenario that was once the highlight of my fortnight.

Fred Hodson - Tasmania

I can't understand why EVERY rule change is made with a negative outcome as its intention. It seems the idiots are hell bent on ruining the racing.

The most recent example is making the front tyres 20mm narrower to restore the balance of the cars, why the hell didn't they make the rears 20mm wider, thereby increasing mechanical grip and improving the chances of an overtaking move, instead they have made the front tyre life so marginal that i'll be surprised if we don't see some catastrophic failure resulting in a serious injury.

Are these people totally incapable of rational thought?

or completely unable to predict the consequences of thier actions?

I am so frustrated and in total despair. while ever we have these lunatics in charge of the asylum the future of F1 will spiral downward until it disappears with a loud sucking noise.

Ainslie Ensor - Somerset, UK

Just lets hope the first GP of 2010 was the worst!!! I will miss seeing 6 races live this year - at the moment I am not sure I mind - may read the review of the races I miss before deciding if it will be a waste of circa 2 hours!!!!!!!!!!

James Heath

Since the 2009 season closed in Abu Dhabi I've been really looking forward to the 2010 season, hamilton vs button, alonso vs massa and the return of Schumacher. I'm a BIG f1 fan, especially since the 2007 season during which I've watched every grand prix on tv and attended silverstone each year, I've already booked my ticket for this year.

I've been eagerly keeping up with the pre season testing times, and latest news on a daily basis. I watched both Friday practice sessions, Saturday practice and qualifying which I thought was very entertaining as the drivers set their fastest times on low fuel, in clean air. I was really looking forward to the race, eager to see how it pans out with no refuelling, what tyre strategies the teams will run, how the different drivers will manage their tyres and cope with degredation etc.

Unfortunately I was very disappointed, it was the most boring race I've seen in a long time. First of all I resent Bahrain being the opening race, I don't care much for the track, especially the slow middle section, the atmosphere was poor etc. I think Australia has always been a brilliant start to the season despite the 7am start time.

The race itself was very processional, I think everybody 1 stopped, the tyres were too durable and nobody suffered serious degredation even Hamilton, as soon as cars got within 1 second of the car in front, there was just no following, no chance to overtake. I think this has even got worse since last year, with even more extreme double diffusers. The only battles I can remember were lower down the grid, I think the most entertaining fight I seen was between a Lotus and a Toro Rosso. I just hope it isn't a sign of things to come for the races ahead but I fear it is. I don't think they'll all be as bad as Bahrain as I regard that circuit as particularly poor but the double diffusers need to be removed FAST so cars can follow and race again, and mandatory 2 tyre stops.

After watching the F1 I switched to Motors TV where they were showing a replay of the Sebring 12 hours, I realised how much more exciting sports car racing is than F1, which is a shame.

Matthew Harrison

Bahrain was dire, but it was just the first race. One of main problems seems to be many fans are already looking back as little as a year ago through glasses so absurdly rose tinted it beggars belief. The majority of the races over the refuelling period were dull processions. It's what you get if you allow aerodynamics to become so critical that cars can't follow each other through corners, and then populate the calendar with tracks comprised of dozens of medium and slow speed corners.

People seem to forget that this isn't the first time cars have completed races without stopping for fuel. It's not the issue. It is unfortunate that the first few races of the season are going to be held on tracks that have never produce a lot of overtaking. More unfortunate still that Bridgestone seem to have produced such durable tyres. Tyre management isn't a factor when they appear more than capable of looking after themselves.

Still the real disappointment was the passivity of the teams. Maybe the computer simulations are to blame. Maybe that was the perfect strategy for every team, but it was disappointing to see everyone settle for the status quo, rather than switching to an aggressive two stop strategy.

Halfway, through qualifying, I thought McLaren were playing clever. Both Lewis and Jenson looked to have backed off in their first qualifying lap on soft rubber. Here I thought was the start of a new era. Short on ultimate pace, both were certain to switch to the harder medium compound and start the race with much longer first stint than those qualifying in front of them. It wasn't to be. Everyone stuck to the same strategy. Was everyone copying rivals, or did the computers say no?

Lets wait for half a dozen races before making changes but if something is required, let's restrict the tyres to the soft and super-soft compounds, so that tyre management is more of an issue. More radical? Make them use all four compounds during a race. More radical still? Immediate imposition of new standardised rear diffuser, as well as front and rear wings.

These would be designed by a third party. They could be designed to produced significant downforce, to keep the cars quick, but with the simplicity that doesn't make them so sensitive to disturbances in laminar air-flow. They could be made inefficient so they could be larger than current wings, providing more advertising space for the teams, and making it possible to rebalance the appearance of the cars. Which, a year later still look a little daft with their big noses and tiny rear-wings. The low efficiency, high drag wings would also help to keep straight-line speed in check, allowing the change to be imposed on safety grounds; whilst the massive hole in the air they would create on straights would help drafting to return to F1. If the teams argue cost, then require them to use the exact same parts for the entire season. One suspects they might spend money on a fabricating the odd new wing at some point. Costs related to integrating the new parts could be off-set against the increased advertising space and the fact that companies might want to sponsor motor-racing were the cars can actually race. Such a change would also attract more publicity for free than could ever be bought.

Jennie Crosier

I like so many others was looking forward to this season with such anticipation. I should have known better. I generally judge how good a race has been by weather I have had time to get the washing out of the washing machine. Well on Sunday after the pit stops nothing was happening so I got the washing out, as nothing was still happening I went and hung it to dry, got back and nothing had happen while I was away. Apart from Vettel's car trouble nothing happened for the rest of the 'non happening event' cannot call it a race and this from someone who still considers F1 at Indy with 6 cars a race.

For what it is worth my suggestions for short term solutions.

1: 12 lap, 1 hour qualifying, do not start on same tires for race.

2: refuelling but without audience or other teams knowing amount.

3: only supply tires that will not make full race and let teams choose which ones they like, no have to use both compounds.

Longer term my suggestions are similar to those of other peoples.

1: less aero.

2: no more Tilke circuits.

3: no more mickey mouse infield bits, the only race that should get away with that is Indy if it is even on the calendar again because the cars can
overtake coming off the banking in to turn one.

Neil Owen

After sundays procession and having read a few others thoughts, I had a thought myself ... why doesn't someone do a new formula? One that allows technical innovation, one that allows the engineers to open their wings and experiment, one that doesn't put such ridiculous and artificial restrictions on the teams.

Allow the teams to decide to develop a car that can run the full race on one tank of fuel or one that is good at short sprints. Allow the engineers to develop mechanical grip levels - possibly even allow the Tyrrell 6 wheeler development from 1976, or the 'fan car' of 1978. Maybe then cars would have less reliance on aerodynamics and be able to get close to the car in front.

Allow moveable wings so that drag can be removed at high speed and increased at slow speed. Total technical freedom!

Perhaps a single rule could be implemented - no computers to govern/work the various developments, they must be activated by the driver. (Otherwise any monkey could drive them - so no active suspension or traction control, etc)

Allowing the engineers some freedom would allow them to invent some new and wonderful things which, if any good, the other teams could incorporate the following season. Why punish a team for being clever?

I know people say that safety is the reason for slowing the cars down, but racing drivers want more speed and as long as the protection of the driver is developed at the same time then new innovations could be created which might filter down into day-to-day cars. Imagine if they had cars doing 300mph but the driver was safe in the event of a sudden stop - that sort of technical brilliance could be used in standard cars.

OK, back to reality ... so maybe cars that are not speed governed is a dream too far, the driver must be able to take the G's and survive any excursions off-track.

But surely there is a middle road, something that still allows the cars to be different without fear of being banned. Surely there is a way to allow mechanical grip AND aerodynamics to play a part. Surely there is room for strategy AND on track overtaking. Surely there is some merit to allowing technical innovation.

Surely there is a way to let the drivers RACE.

Mike Jacobson - Australia

As one of what I hope is a 'silent majority' of F1 fans who long for the days of slipstreaming overtaking, the reason why cars of all formulas have become increasingly difficult to overtake is blindingly simple: 'inverted wing' aerodynamics. The solution is equally blindingly simple: ban anything resembling an inverted wing - front, rear, diffusers, flaps, tabs, and everything inbetween.

Don't believe me? Modify two recent F1 cars to with spoilers instead of inverted wing bodywork, then see how much easier they are to overtake. And how much the drivers' role increases! It works perfectly in FF1600, so why not in F1?!

Then there'd be no need for compulsory pitstops at all; just a pre-race limit to each car's total number of sets of the available tyre compounds.

To paraphrase John Lennon, all I am saying is give wingless cars a chance!

Chris Bryan

I am of the 'certain age' Chris talks about. I almost met Jackie Stewart… He hit the bank at Silverstone next to where I was standing when the throttle didn't close.

The sport needs a paradigm shift.

The circuits should not be tailored to the cars, the cars should go as quickly as possible around the existing tracks. To bemoan the lack of overtaking, while making rules the result in cars that can't run effectively within 1 second of the one in front, so that they can't get close enough to try to overtake is nuts. It's inside - out logic. Tom Sharp used to write very funny books that relied on such thinking.

The cars have to be made so that braking distances are increased, cornering speeds reduced, and so that they are able to run a damn sight closer together than they can at the moment.

The principle upshot is that the aerodynamic downforce, which has been the controlling factor for so many years has to be reduce drastically. Not by the 10% or whatever it was that the last rule changes came up with, that the Engineers (I use capital letter because they are a professional body) can circumvent before the testing prior to the seasons first race, but by 90%.

The cars wouldn't be as fast in the corners but would be a hell of a lot quicker on the straights. I can hear the howls already from the drivers.

It will be dangerous only if the drivers don't have the skills to get the car into the corners at speeds that it can get round them at, and get it opened up on the straights.

From the marketing men it will not be as spectacular and what we saw on Sunday is?

From the FIA the rule changes will be too severe, and will require too much work that's why you are paid that much…

I think the wings should be removed, front and back.. The designers should only be allowed to derive downforce from the bodywork, which would not be allowed to touch the floor No open 'ducts' should be allowed in the body work that do not have cooling purposes or heat exchangers in them.

I think that to have drivers braking a long way before corners, re-introducing the classic outbraking the other guy while not doing it to themselves , and then getting as much power on as they can on the exit without dumping the car into the ditch should be fairly spectacular.

Doug Armstrong - Canada

I started as an Indy Car fan. Watched years of NASCAR (on and off) but I always found time to watch F1. When the real Indy Car died I predominately watched F1. (even through the boring Schumacher years) I love the sport but what I watched Sunday isn't really "sport". What I watched in Brazil was much more entertaining. If you follow the Indy boards you'll find posters complaining about boring common chassis and engines as they have one supplier for each, I agree. When it comes to drivers, they have some great ones and some not so great ones. They have the same buy a ride issues and sponsor troubles albeit on a smaller scale. But they do pass and this makes it entertaining, sporting and worth watching.

NASCAR has implemented the "Have at it boys" clause to promote on track action. This takes away penalties for drivers trying to bump each other in order to pass. In a $.5m car vs a $5m car we don't want to see drivers wrecking but at the same time if they want to win we can't penalize them for trying to pass. We used to call them "racing incidents" now in F1 we call them errors and penalize the drivers for doing it if the pass doesn't come off clean. This is wrong.

I feel that if the cars had enough drag to slipstream and the drivers had enough leeway to pass without penalty we may see more attempts, thus more action. Not asking for much but seems too much for F1.

Christopher Foxon

After watching the race today there should be major alarm bells on the entertainment value of F1. What is already extremely clear is we have gutted F1 racing because of the consequences and risks of wearing your tyres. Martin Whitmarsh worryingly raised the point if there was an early safety car then all the teams would have simply pitted early and driven on the harder tyre till the end of the race. It could have been much worse and the evidence of today was more than enough to demonstrate that to worry is not just a knee jerk reaction. If you will bear with me I will explain the reasons why.

In the refuelling era of F1 from 1994-2009 People always complained about drivers waiting till the pit stops to do their overtaking but whereas that may be true, at least pit stops and the potential variation of events caused by strategies caused were exciting. Others may on the other hand compare today's race to other races where there was little overtaking but in boring races such as the 2004 Hungarian Grand Prix at least we had the excitement of two pit stops to look forward to and drivers were not encouraged to almost literally 'plod' round and not push their cars to save their tyres. Hearing drivers after the race explaining they were not pushing 100% concerned me because the drivers were not being encouraged to take risks and push to the limit. Watching the race it seemed many drivers were in fact actually happy to 'plod' round in position rather than sprint to the pit stops because they were afraid of getting too close to the car in front because it would wear the tyres. This was easily one of the worst grand prix's ever if not the worst.

What also frustrates me is the argument about the need to increase overtaking in F1. Whereas there is some truth in it, the fact is there has been nearly just as much overtaking in F1 in 2009 and 2008 as there was in the 1980's. If we make overtaking too easy all it would do is get the fastest car to the front quicker and then it would stay there. Overtaking is not the only entertainment value involved in F1. The main problem lies with the incentives to overtake and the emphasis in F1 at the moment to come down hard on any driver who dares to attempt a risky pass. Montoya mentioned this when he left F1 in 2006 and he was right, we should not slam drivers who are willing to take risks, within reason of course. We should be encouraging this as well as gambling on alternative race strategy.

Because I am sad enough to have watched many races over the years as well I know 1997 was the year in which we had the best racing and a good balance between the tyre management and refuelling. This was because the tyres that year wore extremely quickly, which meant tyre management was involved, increasing the element of driver skill as well as the extremely exciting element of refuelling and pit stops. This was best shown in the 1997 Argentinean, Spanish and Hungarian grand prix's. These were all potentially boring races which were turned into some of the best races for years because of the reasons explained above. Please watch these races if you can and I am certain you will not disagree with me.

What we need is to combine the best of both tyre management and refuelling. Why can we not have a race in which we have the potential of driver's tyre management combined with the excitement of the sprints of two or three stop refuelling? Do we want drivers only 'nursing' their cars to the end because of the risks following another driver too closely? We must create more incentives for aggressive racing and risk taking, which would also cause a variation in race strategy. By this I do not mean anything stupid likes points for overtaking, fastest laps or pole but by producing short term softer tyres which Martin Whitmarsh mentioned to encourage short aggressive sprint racing till the pit stops. If the tyres wear too quickly this will only encourage varied speeds for drivers during the race and overtaking! This would mean the cars can follow each other more closely as a result in the increase on the emphasis on mechanical grip. The drivers would also not be frightened in wearing out their tyres because even is something goes wrong they could always make a pit stop. Tyre management would still be in the hands of the drivers to, which is the argument for banning refuelling in the first place. We could then combine this with having the excitement of drivers pushing and the excitement of pit stops and strategy ideas. For this reason we need to re-introduce refuelling to, as well as the rule to carry race fuel in Q3. It worked to disadvantage the pole sitter because it closed up the race and created an interesting dilemma for strategy. I know it may be too much now to ask it to be reintroduced in 2010 but it should be brought back for 2011.

With both tyre management and refuelling possible in the same race why can we not have the best of both worlds?

Jim Fisk - New York

F1 needs a complete overhaul. A few little tweaks of these ridiculous rules will do nothing to fix what Max has done to F1. The track patching during the Daytona 500 was more fun to watch than Bahrain.

Selwyn Kerr

Much has been said and written about the poor state F1 finds it's self in, but whilst the 'sport' is controlled by $ very little will change, and the procession will continue to follow the hither to failed promise/s of a brighter future.

The root cause of the problem lies jointly with the FIA and the Teams.

Allow me to explain - the FIA have written rules which restrict creativity and forced each team into producing cars which are so similar that the performances are almost identical, there by precluding any possible chance of overtaking on tracks that have been designed for viewer ship rather than actual racing

The Teams on the other hand are the 'innocent' party. They are so restricted by the FIA rules that they are forced to spent millions of $'s to gain fractions of a seconds over their competitors.

In the short term (2010) I believe the answer is to consider a revised type of qualifying process, maybe reverse order of starting, and reintroduce refueling and retain tyre change pit stops. However, each of these activities must be undertaken separately i.e. tyre change and refueling can not be undertaken at the same pit stop.

Rod Rowlands

I personally enjoyed the race, coverage with the red button giving on board for me was as close as you can get to being in the car. Anyone who hasn't gone carting or car racing with their mates and spent lap after lap waiting for a slight mistake or trying to force a mistake without success or a mistake by yourself will not get it, anyone who has should do. One make racing increases the the likelihood of this happening and with the class rules that we have this is what we get. Yacht racing is the same, some classes run to a formula set down many years ago that makes for very close racing and reduces costs but yachts don't have to follow a track as they have the whole sailing area to use. Some classes like Merlin Rocket are development class where anything goes within some basic restrictions. Super racing but a lot more expensive. But cost isn't the real problem for F1 is it.

I think we may well be better freeing off the basic limitations of F1 like weight, engine size, fuel tank size, number of tyres or pit stops & bring back the days of David & Goliath. I remember the days of Colin Chapman putting a low powered water pump in a wee car that worked really well, they still impress today in the Historic racing. How well did MG & ERA's do with their little jobs in the 30's. I remember the big Ford saloons against the Cortina's and Norman Abbot in his dry sump Anglia in the saloons at Aintree in the 60's They just don't do racing like that any more. Its all very well to have an engine with loads of power but you have to fuel it, carry it and slow it down. You have to loose the heat from what makes it go and what makes it stop and you have to buy the rubber and lose the time it takes to change it. Use of commercially available Tyres of any size BUT commercially available. Engine blocks not limited to car industry would get rid of the 18,000 rpm stuff, not much use to the general public is it, JUST USE A BIGGER HEAVIER ENGINE. Aero reduced so they could not drive upside-down, thats not much use to the general public either & in fact creates a barrier between a car and the car behind & stops overtaking.

What you don't want is success ballast or anything that thwarts the clever design process or any gimmick to randomize the winner, that would be death for F1.

The circuits. Get rid of the narrow micky mouse bits & chicanes, they spoilt the flow of another good circuit on Sunday and the same will happen at Silverstone I'm afraid.

Bring back Formula Libre

Carlos Fernandez - Madrid (Spain)

My faith in motor racing is still alive only because the WorldSiperBike championship already started and the MotoGP/Moto2/125cc championships will start soon.

Go figure.

F1 has become quite interesting to look... at data.

Alonso cleverly saving speed according to Vettel's and Massa's performances, Sebastian stablishing his rythm depending on Alonso closing in or not, Massa doing the same... Wow. Numbers racing against numbers is probably the dream of a mathematician. As a pleasure, F1 has become into an onanistic experience, if you excuse the word. It's all about cars made by engineers that just pleases engineers. They make it, only they can enjoy it.

But looking at the TV screen is, guess the word... boring.

I just hope (pray?) that this is only due to Bahrain circuit being a piece of BS. Come Monza, please. Come Spa...

But still I won't hold my breath, for sure.

Godfrey Lancellas - Cape Town ,South Africa

Yes the same old thing all over again!

People blame the "new regulations" and ignore the problem. (And this includes Schumacher who should know better).

The problem is aerodynamics. All time and money wasted in the wind tunnels to develop little wings, optimize the size of the starter holes, make slots the cockpit to stall the rear wing, etc,etc,etc. is the cause of the downfall of F1.

And not one of the teams is prepared to admit it.

Thank God I am old enough to remember when there was a choice of 2 tires, one of which was nominate by the driver who then HAD to use it for the race

You changed the tyre if it was blistered!, and all started on full tanks. Infarct 95% of the grid was using the same Cosworth motor.

In those days F1 was a glorious RACE event with cars slipstreaming each other and passing whenever possible…a bit like Moto GP is today.

The drivers were also of a different class …they had a lot more balls and a lot less excuses. I suppose you had to have a different mentality if car could bite you. Yet again Like Moto GP is today.

F1 is history

Paul Anderson

Like everyone else I was disappointed with the first race, of what I'd been hoping, would be a great season. I hope it'll get better but I doubt it which is a shame.

What to do? That's the big question isn't it. To me the main change needs to be in the aero dept. The aerodynamics are just too good which causes the well known issues on the cars following. I'm not, as one or two are suggesting, saying bring back wingless cars. Please no! But they could be simplified and the downforce reduced dramatically. I'm no aerodynamic engineer but I'm sure something could be done. This, to me, is the biggest obstacle to overtaking.

And one last point/rhetorical question, if people are sooo against processional racing, why is Monaco so revered?

Andrew Steel

For me the race was a great disappointment.

As a lot of fans did I eagerly anticipated the car launches and watched all the data streams from testing. I couldn't wait until the start of the season but had this nagging feeling it wasn't going to be the same. It wasn't.

For me all of the intellectual depth and strategic skill has gone. This was the X factor of F1. In previuos seasons the track may not encourage overtaking but the teams could counter this with stratergy and team work to engineer track position. That's what F1 is about; a team working together to have one of its drivers standing on the top step of the podium and his team mate on the step below.

They have fundamentally broken F1. Any rule changes they hurriedly apply is like trying to dress a donkey as a princess. Strategy has now become a game of chicken with pitstops decided via dutch auction. Where is the skill in that?

I have never been so disenchanted so soon into a season.

Nick Towsey - Melbourne Australia

It seems that 99% of the fraternity, including the world's 'best' scribes, suddenly blame the lack of refueling as the cause of the so called boring Bahrain GP. But then as a species we are not too bright, eh? (I can expound on that if you like but just look at all the people killed daily in wars and other species consigned to the extinct bin DAILY courtesy of us).

This was ONE race (for the statistically minded) and might I remind Messrs Schumacher, Webber and the fans & 'reputable' F1 scribes, that there were so many boring GPs when we had refueling. Funny enough Mister Schumacher was a huge beneficiary of those times (Though I'll make it clear now I'm a huge fan of Schumi).

NO, my dear dumbdumbs, the aerodynamics are the problem, no-one can get a good old fashioned tow. Why don't they just raise the ride height, that'd help for one. Ok, I'm no technical expert but we seem, as usual for homo sapiens, to be evading the bleedin' obvious. There is hope, I admit, next year's ban on the double diffuser, but why take so long? Also why ban KERs when it was helping the spectacle?????? Another thing is go back to one set of tyres for the race - don't we recall the year we had that recently, the races were much better as certain drivers' wore their tyres out? ahhh, but then stupid political correctness and bureaucracy (the death of all good things) killed that.

By the way, if Vettel had NOT had his engine problem, the last 10 laps may have (I think would have) been thrilling. Also I recall Abu Dhabi last year was seen as a bore. I disagreed. If Hamilton had not had his brake problem, the battle between he and Vettel could have been awesome. I think the problem of today's armchair F1 fan (I've attended 40) is they want instant thrills, like infants, which is what society today is all about.

In the end I don't know all the answers; the teams do, Bernie's latest utterances - for once I agree with them.

Brian Murtagh

Bahrain was one of the worst races I have ever ever seen and I agree with all of the comments in papers, blogs etc. We cannot have races being decided at the first corner and then watch a procession for the next 1.50mins!! I have booked a family trip to Silverstone this year with my 4 year old and I dread it already.

Something needs to be done desperately for the next race - mandatory pitstops, re-introduce refueling (especially as the teams will have all the kit still).

Peter Mann

All of the above + much better TV coverage - by which I mean cameras positioned close to the track so that we get decent views of the drivers and cars, more real sound of the engines so that the commentators have to work harder, less of only Mark Webber twitching at his wheel (as happened on Sunday) and also far less long shots (helicopter views excepted) where the detail of what's going on is lost.

TV has its part to play in make races exciting, but fails miserably: it needs to be set up by a film ('movie' to our colonial cousins in the US) director such as Peter Yates (of 'Bullitt' fame) who understands about car chases. (And, er, isn't motor racing meant to be about car chases?)

Graham Brockwell

Yes it was as bad as you say. It was obvious to anyone who has watched F1 for any length of time, stopping refuelling would remove a vital element from the mix. Not just the stop, but the strategy as well, watching a driver push on a light fuel load, prior to his stop, and seeing which driver/team combination had the best skill/stragey was an enjoyable part of the race.

Now qualifying is more exciting than the race. After 30 or more years of watching F1, And threatening not to watch it any more on several occasions,, I think this could be the season, when I do stop. I will give it a few more races, but this time I think Bernie and his boys, have really done it, and have finally completed their task, and ruined what was the best motor racing in the world.

Eric Mogensen - Vancouver, Canada

The old racer's adage "When the green flag drops, the bullshit stops" seems to have been misappropriated by F1 (TM, Pat Pending, etc.).

Now, it's a sure bet the bullshit actually starts when the green flag drops. It's called a Formula One race.

But really, what more should we expect from the investment bankers that own the show?

They've buggered the global economy, they've buggered our racing. Major points for consistency but the point is, they've missed the point. The buggers.

Go for a walk, ride your bike, do some chores, talk to your family. Or if you like racing watch BTCC, or NASCAR. Nothing like some door pounding and dare I say it: passing?

If you're a fan of Tilke tracks in barren places that are completely devoid of topography, vegetation, and culture, go find some drying paint that needs watching, guaranteed it will be more exciting.

Without some very rapid, intelligent, and major changes, this season is going to be another snooze, despite the promise of driver swaps and new teams.

Eminently missable. Shame. Nonetheless, go Alonso!

Martin O'Connor

If this first GP is an indication of the full season to come, F1 is going to have to come to terms with a couple of realities. The whole sport has always been a platform for engineers, and before downforce was discovered and before competitors (i.e. teams) were allowed a say in the rules, this worked fine because drivers made the difference. That balance will have to be re-engineered if the sport is to remain a mainstream spectator supported activity. But ever since we have had cars able to take drivers through many corners, not simply down the straights, the game has required very basic review.

Competitors able to influence the rules has to stop. Vastly excessive downforce has, for many years, been recognised as the issue to be addressed. That it has not been done is because vested interests, coupled with the FIA's oddly compromised relationship with Formula 1 have led to unbreakable impasses. How Jean Todt deals with it, because only his organisation can, will be interesting to see.

Wayne Hamilton - USA

Bahrain - yes it was awful. I fell asleep at lap 30. I did manage to wake up - rewind - and view the race its entirety. A painful experience.

MS said it best in post race comments - basically - it is what it is, and don't expect things to change with these rules. If we look at the proposed rules for bodywork limitations from 2009 forward - clean surfaces, no appendages, side pods clean - where did that go ? If anything the cars are even more cluttered with splitters, flip-ups and hideous sail type engine covers extending to the rear wings. The rules have so many holes in them, the teams just keep adding aero bits that produce the desired down force numbers. Who really cares about this except the engineers? Budgets are thrown at aerodynamics and wind tunnel time. The results are ugly cars and processional "racing". All of this is old news.

The cars are hopeless in their present form. What to do for the rest of the season ? Not much really. One spec medium soft tire from Bridgestone might help. It certainly can't detract from the present parade we call F1. Long term - eliminate or ban all of these aero appendages except for basic two element wings front and rear. Require a very tight flat bottom configuration and no diffusers. Take a look at the early 1990's Ferrari, Tyrell or McLaren - good start.

Chris Sawyer

Are we surprised that the new Formula 1 season has started so poorly? As you said yourself, it is a business; it is no longer a sport. And it is one that no longer believes in the prime goal of sportsmen everywhere: competition.

Formula 1 is run by despots for the benefit of the anointed. It is not run for the fans, nor has it been for many years. It is a "billionaire boys club" for a bunch of men you wouldn't want to know personally, much less have living next door. Don't think for a minute that they don't abhor the people in the stands and wish they could find a way to eliminate the need for them. Paddocks are closed to all but those lucky few able to get a "Bernie card." Drivers are kept out of sight until they emerge Stig-like to take their place on the grid. Then the whole circus folds its tents and heads to the next town willing to pay for the show.

Lost in all of this, and the incessant prattle about passing and how to encourage it, is the fact that the general public increasingly does not care. Bernie, makes deals with Third World nations willing to pay the price to "prove" they are in the top tier. However, it is only through graft and a combination of political misfeasance that these Herman Tilke-designed nightmares are made. A "sanitized for your protection" race track replacing road courses that possessed both character and history. Government funds used to line the pockets of brigands and thieves who just happen to wear team colors. And this is called "progress."

But let's not forget the spectacle taking place on track. Candy colored variants of the same design, each more expensive than the next, with very little other than the amount of time, effort and money spent on refining the formula. Where is the innovation? McLaren's chimney scoop that feeds air to the rear wing? Not hardly. Last year's double diffuser? Wrong again. This is just coloring extra-close to the lines at very high cost. It is not change, or even an improvement.

We have the ability to control flow based on the caloric content of the fuel. Why don't we? Instead we mandate small V8 engines that spin faster than a dentist's drill. Wings give downforce but take away passing, yet we can eliminate this problem while improving the racing. We don't because this is valuable space that can be sold to a sponsor. It will help foot a bill of many hundreds of millions of dollars in the hopes of reaching its customers, but that patron is increasingly frustrated with what he sees. Pretty soon, the number of sponsors willing to pay the price for a "sport" with waning public support shrinks. And a global economic crisis gives them the cover they need to step away, never to return.

F1 is in crisis. All of racing is in crisis. Has anyone noticed? From processional grands prix to contrived spec races (NASCAR, IRL, etc.) to endurances races that prove nothing, racing is in crisis. It has spread to the junior formulae, and is even making its way to the grassroots. Has anyone noticed? Does anyone care? If I was a corporate chieftain, I'd have trouble justifying the money spent on motor sport. If I ran a car company, I'd think twice about competing, unless mine was a relative newcomer out to establish its credentials. Once that was done, I'd quickly leave.

This is a sport. It thrives on real competition. It lives off the passion and interest of its fans. Racing is as much for them as it is for those who field the teams. The drivers are their heroes. The technology and cunning is the lifeblood that sustains the fans from race to race, season to season. History is the knowledge of what was, and what can be. It anchors the dreams. All have been swept aside by cynics, charlatans and pimps in the pursuit of greater power and glory.

Richard Brown. Calgary, Canada

Was Bahrain the most boring GP? maybe. But I remember being at Silverstone for the Grand Prix in 1971 and watching Jackie Stewart coming round on lap 1 with about a 5 second lead, lap 2 it was about 10 seconds and so on and so on. A 60 lap yawn with no pit stops. F1 has always been the fastest car at the front with the rest trying to catch up. That's racing.

So whats the difference now?

1. It's to predictable. In the 60's and 70's the cars were so unreliable that there was always the possibility that even the leader would not finish. The old saying of "to finish first, first you have to finish" had to come from somewhere.

2. It's a business not a sport. Teams come in and want to stay for ever and make a profit. Drivers are the same. Once in they never want to leave even if they are past there sell by date. Because there is not a high roll over of teams, designers and drivers every one gets used to how it is, reluctant to major change and stale.

3. If a team comes up with a new idea that gives an advantage the first thing all the other teams do is complain and try to ban it instead of trying to come up with a way around it.

4. Racers raced. Even if they where last they still tried to get past the car in front. Now they are just happy to finish and collect their pay cheque

So how do we change it.

1. Stop messing about with the rules and also make the rules more open to allow for more innovation

2. Make the rules favor mechanical grip over aerodynamic grip.

3. Get rid of carbon brakes and go back to steel. You will get longer braking distances and more chance to outbrake someone.

4. Change Bernie. As long as he has long term contracts with the circuit owners and TV companies he doesn't need to change a thing.

5. Teach the drivers how to race and overtake as most seem to have forgotten this most basic skill.

6. No testing at all during the off season. Not only at the track but also on the simulator.

Simon Williams

I was really looking forward to the 1st GP of the season, but by lap 10 I was thinking to myself that suddenly the gardening seemed a better idea and I hate gardening!

I feel the only quick fix is for Bridgestone to bring the 2 softest compounds they have to the forthcoming GP's until another solution is found.

Something needs to be done and fast, if the die hard fans like myself are getting fed up, what about the casual watcher? They are just not going to bother and thats a shame, this promised to be a really exciting season even better than 2007 08 & 9 which were all good years, but I now fear this year is going to be the dullest since 2004.

Mike Knight

If this first GP is an indication of the full season to come, F1 is going to have to come to terms with a couple of realities. The whole sport has always been a platform for engineers, and before downforce was discovered and before competitors (i.e. teams) were allowed a say in the rules, this worked fine because drivers made the difference. That balance will have to be re-engineered if the sport is to remain a mainstream spectator supported activity. But ever since we have had cars able to take drivers through many corners, not simply down the straights, the game has required very basic review.

Competitors able to influence the rules has to stop. Vastly excessive downforce has, for many years, been recognised as the issue to be addressed. That it has not been done is because vested interests, coupled with the FIA's oddly compromised relationship with Formula 1 have led to unbreakable impasses. How Jean Todt deals with it, because only his organisation can, will be interesting to see.

Jose Ramon Cedeno Cruz - Mexico

God, it was awful, waking up at 6:00 a.m. on a Sunday to watch a race is already wrong, but I take it, I like the sport, but looking at this piece of crap, even though Alonso won it, is a nightmare, I won't say this is it, but what a crappy season is expecting us? We lost speed, strategy, emotions, everything! I guess Schumi was falling asleep behind the wheel! I did! Well, lets hope this year goes by fast so we can be fooled again in the next preseason…

Jeff Meyer - USA

As many people have mentioned, F1 is a business and I may have a solution.

The best way to get any business to "wake up" to the needs of their customers is for we customers to simply quit supporting them with our attendance in person or as viewers.

We fans simply equate to dollars in F1's eyes and when the cash flow diminishes, and TV ratings drop the errors of the FIA, CVC and Bernie will force them to take notice.

Hitting them in the back pocket just may get them to re-evaluate and change their ways... maybe .

Rod Van Koughnet - Wellington, New Zealand

Well, we should give it more than one race before deciding to condemn it, though I was pretty bored. I was trying to think of something positive to say after the race. Here's what I came up with: I really like some of the new paint schemes, especially Lotus. I didn't see enough close-ups to be certain, but I think there are some interesting new wheel designs on the circuit. Ferrari at least have done something interesting with their wheels. Lastly, it was nice to see the big smile on Alonso's face. Sorry, that's all I could come up with and apart from hints of interesting technology, these are not the reasons I stay up late to watch F1. The 12:55am time slot on NZ television proved to be far more efficient than counting sheep to get to sleep, though I did watch it in its entirety again the next day.

Neil Fuller

I don't believe that a second mandatory pit stop will help because everyone will now be on the same 2 stop strategy - I think the only solution will be for Bridgestone to produce some significantly less durable tyres that allow drivers either drive as fast as possible and maybe wreck the tyres but make enough time for a pit stop or possibly drive like JB and conserve tyres and use that skill to get ahead.

It will also show the teams that tear the tyres up - possibly showing some of the cars attributes as well as the drivers skills?

So my vote goes for tyres that at the most last 1/2 a race if driven carefully or less if driven hard and hence force 2 stops against a possible 1 stop.

Martin Feldwick

F1's actual status is blazoned across the BBC's home page... until news of Football, Cricket, Rugby crops up. Then its down among the bottom feeders where frankly it belongs. And thats from the company that actually broadcasts it to the UK. What bland boring godless dumps those middle eastern circuits are, as are most of Tilkes cobble ups. Who the hell was the guy sitting with Ecclestone and all those champions.I have no idea but I bet he paid a small fortune for a dud ego trip.

I prayed FOTA would break away. Let the sport be run by people, at least some people, who actually remember what motor racing was. I would rather see six decent races on proper organic circuits like Silverstone, Monza and the like than 20 on empty desert car parks. I still cannot believe that the FIA actually picked teams who knew nothing and could afford nothing ,dropping experienced, resourceful, and practical team owners who already had factory's at the ready. It smacks of nepotism and a lack of reality on the grand scale. All this has to be undone. Most revolutions don't start at the bottom they start halfway up the pecking order. Thats what we need again. A few bloated heads need metaphorically lopping off.

FOTA , your hour has come... whether you like it or not.

Dave Maxfield - Arizona, USA

I'm writing this from the "forgotten land." yes, the USA. I came here in 1980 and have had to deal with only seeing F1 on the box. I started watching motor racing when Mike Hawthorn was racing! And for years I went to Silverstone when it was just a windy and generally cold spot on the landscape, but I got to see real racing. In the 1970's I worked in motorsport, even got to work with James Hunt when he was a couple of years away from being F1 World Champ. I'm a lifelong addict of motorsport.

So what did I do on Sunday? Watched the pre-race show on the Speed Channel and although Peter Windsor was not hosting, it was pretty interesting. Then the race; ... good start .... but why wasn't Webber black flagged for laying a smoke screen? Then it got worse. But salvation arrived, my daughter dropped by with her husband and we ended up outside with our TaG Kart doing a couple of seat-fittings and quick (illegal) trips up and down the street to check things out. Then we chatted for a while until I finally went back indoors and watched the last six laps of "The Race." Didn't miss anything did I?

The answer? It's NOT more stops, passing a car while it is in the pits DOESN'T count as passing! I think they should dump all the "standardization," let the constructors build cars that are restricted only to general size, layout and engine capacity. At the same time, dump the awful looking wing things. If you're going to standardize anything, let it be a front and rear wing and let 'em do whatever they can elsewhere on the car to make them quick ......

As for the best racing on TV? Well it's either Moto GP or Australian Touring Cars. Unfortunately the stuff over here tends to be ruled by Yellow Flags, and that's not just NASCAR, a lot of ALMS races are messed-up by long caution periods!!

Peter Neumann - Montreal, Canada

When F1 announced last year that they would no longer refuel , I could not believe that . A stupid decision in my view. With little passing on the track , the refueling and tire change at least resulted in strategy being required to win a race in addition of course to having a fast car and a competent flawless driver.

The element of strategy has now been removed and at best we have and will have processional races based on the best car / driver combinations and subject to potential mechanical or other failures , the race order will pretty much be determined by the qualification process.

F1 is now a tactical race at best and with on track passing extremely infrequent, it's going to be boring season.

With Michael's comeback and the other champs , excitement could have be at it's peak. Instead , it's a sad and sorry state that Bernie and the decision/ rule makers have created.

Let's hope they wake up ( and fast )

Gavin Pendergrast - NZ

The mandatory pitstops idea is the only way to fix what will be a conservative season in terms of driving & strategy. Everyone is talking about 2 pitstops but why not make it three and have 3 'windows' in which to take these stops. For Bahrain the windows could have been laps 1-15, 16-35, 36-49. It will then let the drivers off the tyre leash that they are currently tethered to. If Alonso had 4 sets of tyres at his disposal he would have had a stab at Vettel much earlier in the race instead of waiting and 'conserving' his tyres until the end of the race. More pitstops = more chance for mistakes and mixes up the runners so the fast cars have to make their way past slower runners who may yet have to pit. The faster guys will always pit a little earlier to get the new rubber which will give the guys behind a chance to race the faster cars as the pitstops play out and mix up what will be a conservative season of racing.

Andy Rylance

Refueling pitstops gave a whole extra dynamic to F1 racing. As we saw late in the last season with the different tactics adopted by Brawn and McLaren, refueling strategy can win and lose races. It also gives opportunity for race engineers and teams to make split second decisions when incidents cause deployment of the safety car. It leaves no room for error. How many teams have we seen holding their heads in anguish after the driver was released (or thought he was released) with the fuel hose still attached. These are all ENTERTAINING. Yes capital letters. Surely that is what this sport is all about. Excitement, frustration, anguish, delight.

Remove refueling undoubtedly reduces team cost, but at a huge cost to the impact of the sport itself.

The penny pinching in what is the second most popular televised sport in the world is quite simply untenable. Where is the high definition (HD) coverage? A huge amount of content produced on TV is now HD. College games are HD. Local news, even my sons go kart races are shot in HD (ok, admittedly by myself!) In fact with the emerging 3D technologies, HD may soon be old hat. Yet Bernie cannot dig into his pockets to bring out the sparkle, the details, the engineering, the sponsors that HD would show with such clarity. He claims there is no demand. Come on Bernie, a high percentage of Formula 1 fans are educated, informed individuals. We know what is happening in the world. We know which channels show F1, and we know they would dearly love to see F1 produced in HD. Don't treat us like idiots.

With the current rules and regulations, the sport is in serious danger. Hell, if Bernie wants to REALLY save some money, let's award points based on qualifying, and skip the race altogether. Let's face it, there's not much difference as things stand. I can't see F1 remaining appointment viewing with processions like Bahrain, so it wouldn't overly affect his viewing figures.

There are many ways for the sport to save money. Most, if not all would end up being detrimental to the sport. We definitely do not want to see team after team dropping out due to cost. However if we look at the history books, there is almost always a company sat on the sideline who would jump at the opportunity to acquire a failing team. Occasionally with unbelievable success (thanks Ross!) This is far better than giving fledgling teams the opportunity to pump huge quantities of money into development only to fall way short of the mark. I for one truly doubt that HRT will get past the halfway point this season. Who benefits from this type of failure? Surely nobody.

If it were me….. bring back refueling, upgrade to HD, (I'll forego the 3D for the moment, I think that would make my head explode!), stretch the difference between the two types of tyres in a race, give each car a boost button which can be used a dozen or so times in a race (as in A1GP). Let's look to ways to generate excitement, not to kill it.

Mr Mudit Jain - Edinburgh

There is no reward for any risks in F1 these days, no reward for pushing the boundaries on or off the track. I thought that was the soul of F1?

In the 'old' days, only points from the best 12 of 16 results counted, allowing for pushing the car and driver to its limits. These days the engines, gearbox etc. have to last many, many races. The cars are all homologated, there is no mid-season testing, so no surprises, changes or upsets over the season as cars are developed.

Common ECU, soon common gearboxes, even possibly common engines and chassis, where are we going!!!

Please somebody, anyone, please name a successful one make series with the glamour and excitement of old of F1!!! That is why it is descending towards solutions more reminiscent of WWF than a sport.

Please, please, please reward some skill which involves some risk and drive, do not punish excitement or reward boring reliability and mediocrity.

It's a sport pushing the limits is how we improve the species, human and F1.

Paul Semnacher

I awoke at 04:40 to watch the race. By lap 4, I knew exactly what I was watching. I went back in bed and had my own snore fest. Formula One is a diamond that has been turned into a Rhinestone by a greedy few.

Bernie and the boys should stop drinking the punch but they don't care, because every fan that I represent, there are millions in the new markets who love what they see...they just don't know what they are missing.

Thanks for your well tempered editorials and to your outstanding staff but sadly it is not enough to keep me interested in the sport; I'm done with F-1.

Mick O'Brien

I watched the the worst race in living memory of any category in the world on Sunday. I watch Nascar in the states, V8's in Australia and every F1 race for the most part. I will not be tuning back into the F1 races until they do something about this farce. There is rarely any overtaking unless it rains. Now it's worse, the cars actually looked slow at the start of the race on Sunday. The FIA or Bernie or someone, anyone who has half a brain needs to get off there A... and fix it. Stop telling us not to panic. You've nearly lost me and my $$$.

Vinayak Pande - India

I saw the changes made to the Bahrain International Circuit and having watched F1 long enough knew that the track layout would not aid overtaking. Especially since the biggest problem in F1 has yet to be resolved; dirty air making it impossible for another car to get close enough to pass. And of course with the narrower front tyres, there is less mechanical grip. Unlike the knee-jerkers, I think the ban on in-race refueling is a good thing as drivers now have to step up their game and do their overtaking on the track instead of in the pits. I don't find it interesting to see cars sitting in the pits for five to ten seconds longer than they have to right now (with the tyre stops) and it certainly didn't prevent processional races in the past.

I'm not really sure what people were expecting to see with in-race refueling banned or what difference they expected it to make if F1 continues to visit circuits like Bahrain, Catalunya, Budapest and the aerodynamics continue to muddy the waters. I sincerely hope F1 stops repeatedly shooting itself in the foot by leaving open loopholes like they did with the diffuser when they were reworking aerodynamics for the 2009 season.

John Griffin - Worcester

I, like many, was expecting to see some racing last weekend. Schumi was back, Button and Hamilton duelling in their McLarens, Red Bulls baying for revenge from last year.

I forgot to set the recorder so had to watch the highlights... That proved to be long enough! The highlight was to see where Vettel ended up! If all we can look forward to is a tyre change, we need more to create the sport of racing reappear.

Bob Jones

I started watching F1 in 1993 because it was an alternative to studying for high school exams and I've been a fan ever since because of all the intrigue, UN-predictability and all the different strategies and the ways decisions made could make you the king or turn you in to the fool. And I suppose I will be a fan until it gets to the utterly ridiculous. But alas until some exceptional strategy proves me wrong (and dear god I hope someone does) that's where we are heading. I mean at present the only workable strategy that presents itself is what we saw in the first round and no matter how you look at it, even with sugar and spice and every thing nice it doesn't make for exciting or even slightly entertaining racing?

Merrin Bugg

That's it Bernie, just wait and see what happens down the track. After all, the great unwashed have already booked their seats for Australia and Malaysia and all your contracts are locked in place. So what crisis really? Who cares if all people are going to see is sterile procession; and, did I read correctly where you were lecturing teams on F1 being a show instead of a business? Why sell the "Show" to places where no one wants to go or can afford to go? My solution before Melbourne…. ban tyre warmers as Bridgestone suggested (but surprise, surprise the teams rejected).

Ivan Ivanov - Bulgaria

Let's not forget that this was the first race after a considerable change of the rules. So any reaction in panic will make things even worse. In my opinion there have to go at least two more races to see if there is a trend and where this trend leads to. Things are not good though. Teams took an over conservative approach. No one ever dared try a different strategy.

It may be because teams and drivers are still under the influence of the long established and mastered pit stop overtaking tactics. And therefore they have lost a lot of tactical creativity.

It may be because they fear losing valuable points now that points are given down to 10th place.

It may be because of micromanagement and limitations at all levels. Rules micromanage the sport to the smallest detail, teams micromanage their drivers literary telling them what to do at every turn. Too many restrictions, too much accent on endurance and saving valuable resources for the next race. Teams cannot get out the most of their particular design because car cannot be set up separately for qualification and race. They cannot select a tyre compound which suits them best.

Of course, I may be totally wrong. But as fan who has followed F1 for more than 20 years, I don't like what I see. And it is not overtaking as such, or to be precise the lack of it. A race may not have a single overtaking and still be very exciting.It is the lack of close battles, attack and defense, continuous chasing and wheel to wheel duels till the end. Early in the race everyone is in conservation mode, hoping for the better next time. At the same time, those who govern the sport go round in circles and cannot think anything fresh except more restrictions or artificial components incompatible with the sporting spirit. Let's wait and see in the hope that there will not be the usual knee jerk reactions we've witnessed for more than a decade.

Gary Cain

I have been a follower of F1 for 30 years now and the biggest problem I see is the constant meddling of the FIA and the fiddling with the rules to try and get the racing back. Rules do not make for good racing. The lack of rules does. Give the teams a engine displacemnet limit. Give them limits on
the type of aero they can run, and other than that leave them the heck alone.

Let them run whatever tire they want when they want it. Let them refuel when they need to. And please, please, please never let Tilke design another worthless track!

We know what tracks work. We know that Spa, Silverstone, and Monza will give you a great race. We know that the Hungaroring is at best a karting track.

Stop designing Hungarian race tracks and design more Silverstones!

Will Baker

I think that the quick fix is simply to instruct Bridgestone to bring two overly soft compounds to each race; that way multiple pit stops will be required, and more so by the drivers that are heavy on tyres. Longer term the whole rear diffuser area needs simplifying; one tall, wide, square and above all simple rear wing that cuts a hole in the air rather than spoiling it for the car behind, and no more wings on the engine cover, as if nothing else it looks horrible.

Norman Wilson

My view is that Pitpass, and many others, are missing an important point. Many in F1 see the winning as their only objective, if they can win, who cares about passing.

The evidence is incontestable. The lack of passing has been under discussion for longer than it took to design and build the moon-lander, but nothing has happened. That intelligent (in the case of some, very) men have ducked and weaved around such a critical issue for so long shows an impressive degree determination. Why?

Constraints on engine design, also the materials used in their construction mean that they are now all roughly the same, both in mass and power. Geometrically all the suspension systems are similar, and must be if the tyres are going to work. Further, the tyres themselves are similar, this said on the basis that most front running teams start races on the same option.

Assuming the constraints listed above, aerodynamics is the only major area left where a competitive edge can be found. As one involved (successfully) in the 60's I well understand the competitive imperatives of F1, were I an aerodynamicist in the 2000s, the main issue would obviously be down-force/drag ratios, but would the magnitude of the resulting wake be a concern.... Then again, it might, and no one would ever know.

Short of imposing down-force limits, the only solution is to reduce the surface area of the aerodynamic elements. That the very limited efforts in this area have been ineffective is well proven by the continuing inability of faster cars to pass slower ones..

An unrelated problem making passing more difficult is tyre wear. The large amount of rubber abraded from the tyres means that it is not long before the track is essentially only one car wide, those who venture onto the marbles do so at some risk.

You ask what could be done before Melbourne, easy, don't go. We live only 300 metres from Albert Park, I go to practice/qualifying, but never on race day, a waste of time. Better to watch the start on TV, then mow the lawns.

A great feeling running along behind a Briggs and Stratton with a 19,000 RPM exhaust note. But the harsh reality is that it's a dream, like seeing more passing in F1.

Tim Cumming - Canada

If I read about the "pinnacle of motorsport" one more time, I'll retch. It's been a long time since F1 was the pinnacle of anything.

My F1 history goes back to the '60s. I attended races at Watkins Glen and Mosport in Canada in the early '70s. Saw Gilles Villeneuve's first race for Ferrari. Jackie Stewart, James Hunt, Fittipaldi, Andretti, and on and on. We used to camp for the weekend, a pit pass was about ten bucks - you could walk through the garages (at the back behind a rope), watch mechanics at work. Colin Chapman, so close I could hear his conversation with an engineer. Fittipaldi trying a new seat. Ronnie Peterson, having his lunch. A weekend of racing - sometimes thrilling, sometimes not, but racing!

What a sad joke it has all become. Greed, avarice and self-importance are the at the root of F1's current sad state. F1 is now all about 5 star hotels, world class restaurants, valet service, limousine and helicopter pads so the pampered few don't have to mix with the great unwashed. A weekend out at a private club for millionaires, with a race as a backdrop. Far-flung exotic locales in countries run by sheiks and potentates, none of whom give a s*** about F1 or racing. Multi billion dollar facilities, built for TV viewing by the video game crowd. Paying fans at the tracks? Merely TV backdrops and suckers for paying thousands for a grandstand seat far fom the action, to see a few cars parade by every few minutes. Pay your money, sit in your seat and then get out and go home.

I could go on, but you get the point. I can pin-point the exact moment several years ago that F-1 lost me, but that's a subject for another email. Who's to blame for this sad state of affairs? Max Moseley and Bernie Ecclestone and their myriad stooges have to shoulder some of the blame, but not all. The team owners, drivers, managers, et al have happily basked in F1's "pinnacle" glow for so long that they can't - or won't - see that the glow has faded to a faint memory. They have all become addicted to the lure of money and fame. They are all responsible for standing by and allowing the sport to become an entertainment. A spec series, made-for-tv, and no more. A mere business competing for my money, like so many others.

I don't think it's fixable. Not by adding pitstops or different tires or more new rules and artificial "excitement". F1 has had a good 50 year run. Like the Can-Am series in North America in the '70s, its time has come and gone. I think it all just needs to go away. Maybe something new will come along to replace it.

Greg Cunneen - Tokyo

I don't think Bahrain is a sign that things are much worse, but they clearly have not improved. We've had boring races in the past too. I fell asleep twice while watching the Chinese GP two years ago, and I was in the pit straight stands at the circuit!

New teams not finishing is not a problem. In fact, if some of the old teams stopped finishing more often, the race would be more interesting. Everyone, except Max (retired) & Bernie, knows that it is the aero regs that prevent close racing; and if it isn't "close," then it isn't really racing. But that's only something that can be 'fixed' in a subsequent year with a rewrite of the regulations, not between now and the next race.

In the short term, I say get rid of the 2-tier tyre system and use overly soft tyres that force stops, not mandated stops. I would much rather see some teams making 2 stops while another must make 3, not everyone making the exact same number of stops. Mandating 2 stops and keeping the 2-tier tyre rule is just the same show as last year.

Andrew Smith - Toronto, Canada

Here is a thought. Instead of making 2 mandatory pit-stops, how about making refuelling optional? If a team wants to do a one-stopper on a full tank of gas it's their option to do so. If a team wants to do short stints with lighter cars, allow refuelling. With all the different strategies out there, I think it would really spice things up. If everyone is on the same strategy that's how you create boredom. The FIA can save face using this idea because at least forcing all the teams to design cars with bigger tanks won't be a waste to those that opt to run on a full tank with one 3 second pit stop.

Tony Geran - Sydney

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Oh is it over? I watched qualifying as that was vaguely interesting but left the race after 5 laps, has to be the worst race I've not watched since Indy 2005.

I have a suspicion that F1 has reached its nadir, particularly in Australia as they are advertising General Admission tickets for Melbourne for Sunday for $99 (they were over $200 two years ago). Probably more to do with the ridiculous late start (17:00) so you Brits can watch it with your Sunday morning breakfast as most (sane) people couldn't be bothered going to a race that starts at the end of the day and then have to pay five nights accommodation to some greedy hotelier for a one or two night stay. Oh did I say race? I meant procession. I thought Australian Touring Cars (or V8 Supercars as they describe it for the Bogans) were bad but F1 is worse. So much BS about it being the ultimate form of motor sport. Absolute garbage, I'd rather watch a rally at least those are potentially unpredictable. For me Motor GP and World Superbikes are the best sort of racing around nowadays.

June Abbott - Sydney, Australia

I only started watching F1 in 1996 when refueling was 'the norm'. I cannot compare Sunday's race to previous competition when refueling was banned. I am reserving judgement until we are few more races into the season. Teams and drivers need time to adapt to the new challenges. However, I like refueling because it reminds the spectator that F1 is about the team as much as the driver; the ability of the crew to turn around a pitstop efficiently, the variety and brilliance of strategy, the ability of the driver to complete metronomically consistent qualifying-laps - a skill apparent in less than a handful of competitors. Ross Brawn's strategic brilliance emerged from rules allowing refueling!

The public outcry arising from the Bahrain GP surprised me - particularly the opinions from the Paddock; as a fan I feel vindicated because I WAS disappointed (should I have waited a few races before buying the living timing app for my iPhone? Can I get my money back?). In an attempt not to be reactive, it is suggested F1's demise is not JUST a result of the refueling ban. Perhaps the hype, expectations and poor venue choice contributed to the general sense of disappointment.

It is apparent from the disparate views expressed in this Talking Point that a section of fans will never be satisfied - refueling vs non-refueling epitomising the divide. How can F1 achieve consensus in the face of such fundamentally different expectations? One fact, however, remains unassailable irrespective of the rules. Business is dominated by the dollar, sport by competition. While F1 is promoted as a business rather than a sport, it is doomed.

I passively boycotted races/seasons 'watching' F1 via live-timing, the numbers on the screen being far more interesting than the sanitised on-track action. If the Bahrain GP proves representative of 2010 season, I will revert to my collection of previous season DVDs while the live-timing numbers tell the story.

As always, thank you for the opportunity to express our views. Pitpass continues to raise the standard of F1 journalism. Great job! Very, very well done.

Jeff Lepine - Sarasota, Florida

Year after year after year the powers that be in F1 have told us that they are working to improve the racing and pretty much year after year we have had the same processional races that fail to entertain. Over the past few days I've read about how team bosses and drivers say that the current rules do not support and exciting brand of racing, meaning very little to no overtaking. I have read several driver comments that are saying that the ban on refueling is a large reason for the lack of overtaking. My interpretation of this is that the drivers think that the fans are entertained by seeing overtaking happening in the pit lane or by a driver doing a quick in or out lap before or after a pitstop and passing without an actual overtaking maneuver. Personally I don't consider this overtaking. Overtaking to me means a pass on the track where a driver behind passes a car ahead with a bold skillful move.

Another reason that I believe the racing has gotten worse and worse over the past several years is the design of every new track. Is there a designer on earth other than Hermann Tilke that can design an F1 track? Frankly his tracks SUCK! They look pretty, they probably have good drainage, make for nice camera angles, etc, but as far as being quality racing circuits his designs fail miserably.

Basically my suggestions as a layperson would be

1. No more Tilke circuits.
2. Less aerodynamic down force, more mechanical down force ie wider tires.
3. An overtaking button that gives a short burst of 25hp or more that can be used 5-10 times per race.
4. Maybe a bonus point for fastest lap or perhaps a bonus for overtaking on the track.... not in the pitlane or on an in or out lap.
5. This doesn't really have anything to do with overtaking but I am in complete agreement that the 107% rule needs to be reinstated.

But hey..... King Bernie says everything is fine so I guess it must be.

Phil Davis - Sydney

How do 'Indy' cars manage more overtaking and a generally more user freindly spectator sport? Less complicated aero, for one. Harder tyres? manual gearbox? Steel Brake discs? more scope for driver error and more overtaking zones = more overtaking. would harder tyres stop the 'marbles' when you get off line that stops a driverusing all the track? F1 is looking like a slot car race, nose to tail.

Marco Cenzatti

I must be missing something: why all these byzantine regulations about number of pitstops and tyre sets? Last year the complain was that races were decided with the pitstops. Now we are reduced to hope for more pitstops!

To me the obvious issue is that with all the aerodynamic bodywork it is impossible to get close to the preceding car, let alone slipstream and overtake. Would it be so difficult to convince the teams (or is it the FIA?) to get rid of diffusors etc.?

Bani McSpedden - Sydney

It should be renamed Formula Gone. F1 is suffering because it's followed the money to the utter detriment of the spectacle. Hence processions at venues with no history, no atmosphere, no crowds and no understanding of motor racing. Thanks to a regime that in its absurdity would seem more at home in Zimbabwe, we have something about as interesting as watching a cash-register opening and closing. Oh dear, why did I buy that iphone app - to keep track of the predictable?

John Elich - Belgium

I have to agree with Bernie that we will have to wait and see how the current regulations will be picked up by the teams.

As for overtaking there is a definite problem, however it is hard to say where this problem is. One can blame the aerodynamics, yet in the back of the field drivers can overtake their teammates, who are running the same car. Then again Mark Webber was following the car in front of him while being (based on his team mate) at least half a second a lap faster.

Before blaming the engineers and aerodynamics, I will put a part of the blame on to the drivers, who have been taught to race on strategy alone, and seem to have forgotten about actually racing each other. Fernando Alonso put in times a second a lap faster once he had passed Vettel, yet seemed to be contant driving behind him at a settled pace. Massa was equally just concerned with holding his place. Hamilton made up a lot of ground, then dropped it because of some vibration. All in all, teams and drivers are 'playing it safe' instead of going for the fastest pace they can.

The obligatory conservation of engines, gearboxes, fuel and tyres may play a part, but there is also something as the will of the driver and team to take risks. This seems to have been forgotten even more than all other things.

Pat Healy - Surrey

Apart from manual gear boxes and tyres - which I mentioned in a post on another site a couple of days ago along with the dying art of "toeing and heeling" e.t.c. which all have the potential to produce little mistakes that both add to tyre degredation and in turn overtaking possibilities - a few things things keep coming up in my mind when I think about this issue.

1) The entry and exit of La Source and the run down to and through Eau Rouge at Spa - Drivers take various lines into and out of La Source wide in wide out, wide in narrow out, narrow in wide out (it used to be more prevalent before they inexplicably narrowed the exit by putting a kerb in there on the exit to stop drivers running wide) but this corner often led to a side by side drag race out of it and down to Eau Rouge - testing the "nuts" of the brave to see who lifts first at Eau Rouge - to further prove the point it was often repeated to a lesser extent at the Adelaide Hairpin at Magny Cours - maybe introducing more corners like this - very slow but wide track at entry & exit - should be introduced or existing ones modified (marbles don't seem to be a problem at these corners)

2) A good few years back now CART in the US introduced a mandatory element to the rear wings on their cars to improve slipstreaming and overtaking - the first incarnation actually proved too "good" and you had cars passing each other 5 or 6 times on the straights in 1 lap!

But they fine tuned it and reduced it's effectiveness for the following races and it definitely worked - now before anybody bangs on about "This ain't Indycar or whatever" I know that but the Overtaking Working Group have had their chance and come up with nothing - so perhaps until they do the FIA/Bernie should force something like this on them to focus the minds a bit better.

3) Why have the FIA or Bernie's lot not had the foresight to get some of the clever guys who are currently not employed in F1 but have been in the past - to put together an FIA endorsed & Bernie financed Test Team to try various solutions to the overtaking problem with real cars in a real environment - Bernie owns his own track for gods sake - Paul Ricard - to see what improves things and what doesn't - They could try different wing configurations, different brake materials, big wings, little wings, no wings, high wings, no diffusers ! wide track, narrow track, fat tyres, hard tyres, soft tyres the list is endless - and we all know of a couple of 2010 spec cars, that are ready to race but haven't been allowed to, that could be put to good use whilst they wait for a slot next year (Stefan GP) - Bridgestone could also take the opportunity to test different spec tyres away from the glare of a race weekend to see how they can help things - As was mentioned on this site a couple of days ago - It's F1 - It ain't Rocket Science !!

Steve Turnbull

The sole reason that everyone is getting in a fix is because we were promised the 'Best F1 Season Ever!' The hype was unbearable, ridiculous, and unjustified. What transpired was a boring race - they happen, they always have (even Dijon 79 was as dull as a rainy day in Manchester until the last few laps) - on a boring subject in boring surroundings. I don't buy this 'these cars can't overtake' line at all, and even Mark Webber made a point that goes some way to back it up when he said, and I quote;

"He didn't make a mistake and if I'd tried to force the issue it would have ended in a crash. "

In other words he means 'it wasn't worth me taking a risk'. It's not that he could not have done, but that he didn't want to. The problem of 'dirty air' is one that has been with us for a couple of decades, yet we've seen some great races in that time; we've also seen great races in the days when drivers went right through, no pit stops, no tyre change, no refuelling. We saw some pretty poor processional ones, too. That's how it is.

I'm absolutely stunned at the short sighted response - not of the mainstream press, for they know no better (even the UK's 'Sports Writer of the Year, Martin Samuels, in the Daily Mail proclaimed that Michael Schumacher hadn't raced at Bahrain since he retired in 2004)* but from those involved in the sport itself; two mandatory pit stops? Surely, if Bridgestone can produce tyres capable of going the distance, the two compound rule should be removed and the option NOT to pit be given as a strategy choice?

What riles me most is that this complete and utter tosh comes after one race - one boring, uneventful (unless you were Adrian Sutil or Robert Kubica) race; there were no safety cars to 'spice up the show', the leader developed a problem when it looked like there may actually be a race on our hands between him and the chasing Ferrari's, and everyone was super cautious on strategy because it was the first race of the year and nobody really knew quite what to expect. Had the race been interrupted by a couple of safety cars, had Vettel not had a problem and Alonso chased him down to the flag, had a coupel of pit stops by the front runners been less than perfect and resulted in 'exciting' mistakes, we would not even be having this conversation.

It was a dull race - that's all. Let's wait and see if they're all like before condemning the sport to yet more knee jerk rule changes.

* Martin Samuels knows everything about everything, he cannot be wrong, Michael must have retired in 2004 - Ed

Mario Martinelli - Victoria, Canada

Drivers , commentators and pundits all seen agree on two things:

1. Aerodynamic requirements make following close enough to pass impossible.

2. Tilke circuits are pretty, but boring.

So: why not get rid of /one /of the wing setups? Let them run either front or rear wings, that should make cars unstable enough so someone might be able to pass.

Let them refuel. Why did they stop?

Give them free rein on testing and development. If you can't pay to play, sit in the stands. Tinkering with mandatory pit stops or degraded tires to force stops isn't going to fix anything. Bernie's 'short cuts' are about as clever as a ten-year old's 'do over.' If a sport needs a 'gimmick' to make it exciting, it needs to die. F1, unfortunately, is heading in that direction.

Graeme Cooper - Australia

F1 got it half right. They finally fix qualifying (remember the one-lap yawn fest a few years ago) to have a low fuel flat-out effort on Saturday and follow that up with 50 parade laps on Sunday! The most excitement to the race was a few overtaking moves caused by Vettel's sparkplug.

Paul-Henri Cahier

I've been around F1 for a while, and although it is true that racing has never been "fantastic" all the time, that is clearly not the point; what everyone rightly expected was that racing could be great. The glorious uncertainty of the sport, if you wish.

The two things that strike me today are:
-the fact that the possibility of true racing has pretty much vanished
-the fact that racing has been actually replaced by corporate business

Now the intersting question is: are the two linked, and to what extent?
Pretty obviously, the very purpose of racing has nearly vanished in F1. Not that the drivers don't want to race, but everything around them says: "don't race"

The FIA says: "if you start to actually race, you must realise this is considered dangerous and unsafe, so we'll probably have to punish you".

The FIA and Bernie say: "Herman (Tilke), no fast corners please, that's a source of danger, and we would need such gigantic runoff areas that it's not good financially; please design tracks with plenty of second and third gear corners, and chicanes, and plenty of places for billboards in full TV camera view.

The Team says: "Every point counts, and considering the actual point system, better play it safe; we need points, besides they earn us good money with Bernie".

The Technical team says: "Save fuel, save tyres, save the engine, save the gearbox".

The Regulations say: "You can (must) build a car with massive downforce and ultimate braking power; it guarantees great lap times and limits passing opportunities"

The Green Party says: "F1 cars must go clean and green, that's the future!".

So tell me, how are we going to have any real racing in F1? Let's face it, there is no hope, really. Unless a Revolution...

Oliver Payne

How do they manage it. The winter build up is better than the racing. Sorry did I say racing !!! The disappointments are now getting too much to take every year.

Get rid of all driver aids including pit to car radio and engine / monitoring control from trackside. Bring back manual gear change. Body only aerodynamics with no wings. Dump useless Mickey Mouse tracks like the appalling money driven Abu Dhabi nonsense .

Some hope.

Robert Passman - Maryland, USA

A very well done set of thoughts. I try to avoid the rant because they are non-productive. As a retired engineer, there are approaches to fix racing issues that could be taken and it seems, as you pointed out, Mr. Ecclestone has gone off the wall with ideas. His soul goal appears to be finding new venues that will pay - broadening the appeal of the sport will take more than putting local or native drivers into cars. Looking at some of the stands, attendance isn't doing too well even assuming for increasing interest over time.

Suggestions (seen many places already)

1. Return to Q3 shoot out was a great idea. Subsequent tossing in of the tyre rule made it irrelevant. As we saw, it would have been foolish to drive the cars any more than a single short qualifying run to save the tires. No one went out. Some shootout. Return to earlier Q3's and let them use whatever tires they choose.

2. Mandating a pit stop (tyre rule again) where the top teams are now separated by less than one second (2-3 seconds changes), doesn't allow for a big gain or loss as before where, at least, fuel strategy played some part in determining stopping points and length of the stop. Mandating a second stop won't do a thing.

3. Figuring a stop time is going to be pretty straightforward for the engineers barring an incident on track. The increase in performance with fuel burn is a known factor(this is now linear or close to it). The change in performance with tire wear is another known from Friday data collection.

With this data, the engineers can calculate the time to complete the race without on track incidents. It could change when caught behind a slower car but the inputs for known factors can be reset on a continuing basis. Plotting two or three performance curves will show optimum stopping points where they intersect or running a "monte carlo" analysis will also provide the best point.

4. Passing is obviously a bigger issue now because of the tire issues. In Bahrain, Alonzo had the fastest lap and presuming he could have caught Vettel if he caught him after 40 of 49 laps, for example, he may have destroyed his tires getting by with too many laps to go. Reset to point 1 at this stage. The logical time to make a move is in the last lap or two so that if you get by, you'll have enough to stay ahead. Why would it be any different that what we saw in Q3?

5. While the tracks could have something to do with passing, (Monaco was always tough), before these incremental changes began such as design freezes, KERS (with specific limits on output), engine freezes and the changes allowed for equalization of power, 2 tire rule, etc. there was passing - even when all the high tech tricks were in place. I believe that was because there were significant handling differences and engine performance differences (more or less torque, etc) in various sections of any course which provided the opportunity to pass.

6. Let the teams decide what tire to use. Give them the options and use whatever they like.

7. F1 (FIA) says it wants to be a "green" and relevant sport. Yet, the powers that be are doing every thing they can to stifle innovation. Racing is all about developing a better car than the others and having a better driver to handle it. If you want a far out idea, give them 200 gallons of fuel (in 2012) for a 200 mile race and let them run what they want, KERS (no limits), turbo diesels, 12 cyl, 4 cyl,, refuel or not, whatever. Then we'll see some innovation that might provide a carryover to the automotive community. Give them a spec tire and that's it. It will also be easier to police.

8. Eliminating testing is the reason Brawn was ensured of the title last year. We can't say they would not have won it, but without in season testing, the time it takes even for well equipped teams to catch up is extended. In season testing needs to be allowed. As someone suggested on another site, go to the track three days early and do all the testing you want.

9. No one can argue with the concept of cost containment and some of the moves would not affect the racing but it isn't NASCAR. NASCAR is about the drivers and the template racers are all the same. The big money teams rise to the top there so yes resources still count. You cannot do anything about that. I believe F1 has problems that are getting worse. An analysis has to go back to some point in time where racing was the way they want it to be now - 1979??? - then look at the effect of the incremental changes over the years.

I think your articles are very insightful and this approach to suggestions is the best way to do it. The F1 survery last year was another example of how little specific information can be garnered with those things. I can write one, as surely as you or almost anyone, that no matter what respondents really feel, the answers will reinforce my own desires. Perhaps with the exception of the dead in the water "medal" idea.

Ben Gould

God that Race was boring. IMO there are some things that have to be done right now. Bridgestone have to develop a super soft qualifying tyre, and keep the prime. Q1 and Q2 stay the same. Q3 stays the same, but, those going through to Q3 must start the race on Quali Super softs, and must complete a statutory amount of laps on that tyre. Lets say 10% race distance, plus the amount of laps your position relates to. So on a 60lap race, Pole position man would have to complete 6 laps plus 10 before he can change, Second place man, 6 laps plus nine, and so on all the way down to position 10. The other runners can start on what ever they want, and change when they want. So if you have a qual tyre that has an operating window of 2 fast runs before it starts to degrade, six laps into the race, you are going to see the the other guys start to catch and pass. Mandatory pit stops will not do it, but a degrading tyre efficacy will have the effect of slowing the front, so that everyone else can pass. The faster cars will then pass the slower cars anyway after their stops.

Then we have got to get rid of the 18000 rpm limit. Increase the limit to 20000, and one engine to last two races. Penalties for extra engine use remain. Cosworth reckon their engine will rev to 21000, so let them run it. If it breaks, then a penalty ensues, simple as. If it doesn't they win.

It is a fact that as the modern day motor car has become more reliable it has become boring. All we have got now is formula reliable... yawn. If they want to run KERS let them. They all developed it, it's still in the regulations, so let them use it.

Yes ban the diffusers, but what we don't want is Indy Car replicas.

I just think it would be cool, to see Alonso start on pole, roar away, and then see his quails fall off the side of a cliff, and the guys from 10 onwards reel them in, during the "Off Window ", only to be caught again in the latter stages of the race, but the other guys having a set of super softs available to catch them all up again.

Graeme Vincent - Australia

I thing the racing should be given at least until we're back at Europe before we make any major changes, BUT MAJOR CHANGES SHOULD BE MADE! I agree the tyre rule should change to 1 soft tyre for all runners and let them pit as many times as they like for fresh rubber.

Something needs to change or this season will be a tradgedy.

Peter Casalis - Marmaris, Turkey

First point - NO quick fixes. Jean Todt stands for a change of regime at the FIA which, hopefully, is leading us to a future of F1 as a sport with rules that are fixed for the sporting good and not changeable at the whim of competitors or any other party. The public want stability and clarity in the rules. We have the 2010 rules and must live with those for better or worse if only to show that this is a sporting event and rules do mean something. It is essential the FIA stands firm.

However things must change in the long term and the basics are these:

1 Stop pretending F1 can be about saving the planet, or that it is a pin-up sport for health and safety. It is about car racing first and foremost and "races" decided primarily on fuel economy and tyre wear do not represent the "pinnacle of motorsport".

2 Open up the regulations, return to being leading edge technology aimed solely at producing the fastest car. We have endured years of negative regulation in the various Mosley causes of safety, green appeasement, cost saving, general killing of innovation...... Current Formula one does not appear much more difficult or risky than kart racing. It is time for some positive deregulation.

3 Stop emasculating tracks to appease mediocre drivers. We need some corners that reward the brave and punish the mediocre. Use of the pedal under his right foot should determine his safety not the size of run-off area.

4 Reintroduce refuelling because it introduces a layer of tactical interest now missing and it showcases the team aspect of F1 by being necessary when cars are built to that rule. For all the talk of winter training and 3 second pitstops being race critical, it seems clear that if it was not mandated, probably nobody would be stopping.

5 Stop assuming the public to be dumb. We can understand the technological brilliance, we can understand the tactics of races with refuelling, and if you will let them off the leash, we might occasionally be forced to concede that F1 drivers do things we cant!

In summary, reintroduce risk. Return to the most radical cars being raced by great drivers on difficult tracks at speeds that give meaning to that phrase our current generation of pampered drivers so love to use: "on the edge".

Lets see which of them really understands the phrase.

Henri List - Ontario, Canada

And the Merry Go Round starts again. F1 just doesn't get it and if they don't get it soon I'm afraid they will have lost me and many other die hard fans.

Here are a few suggestions: get rid of this 18,000 RPM limitation and let them tweak the engines to their heart's content, use any tire you want for the race-none of this 2 tire mandatory useage, don't bring back refueling, get rid of those awful shark fins and high noses on the cars and last but not least - bring back some driver control in the form of a clutch pedal and gear shift. Like Mark Webber said, these cars are too easy to drive. There is no innovation, just a set of rules to follow that makes this no better than spec racing. I agree on a cap to limit what you can spend but free up the limitations. You need horsepower to pass so lets see what the engine manufacturers can do and if that means some produce 1,500 HP and others 1,300, so be it. Hopefully someone will come to their senses but I doubt it.

Andy Castledine

It wasn't just the fact that the new rules have turned the actual race into a boring procession and I can't say I saw a lot of pre season comments that said it would. So where were all these experts when the rules re no-refuelling etc were being made...

That said, to make Bahrain the opening race was a big mistake. No atmosphere, no crowds, no carnival. It's like the Crown Prince plus a bunch of cylebs in the middle of the desert ... I watched an interview with Nigel Mansel on the Saturday and he said he wanted to thank the Organisers for creating this magnificent spectacle... He was standing in the pit lane and no there was no one to be seen anywhere .. no fans, no flags waving, no supporters .

I think Bernie made a major mistake .. should have kept Australia as the opener at least we would have enjoyed watching a true F1 fan based carnival and not a sterile Crown Prince private event.

Rod Aguirre - California, USA

I was 14 when I saw the first black and white photos of the Lotus 49 that Jimmy Clark drove to a win in Zandvoort in 1967. I'm old enough to have seen different in F1.

My opinion is simple:

1) Get rid of all aerodynamics other than that necessary to keep the car on the track. The compliance with the aerodynamic limits could be achieved by measuring the turbulence around cars at different speeds. It should be easy to model exactly the space needed for overtaking; the rules should emanate from that more than from arbitrary dictation on design that can be easily loopholed by creative engineers.

2) Allow the teams the freedom to refuel and change tyres as they please. Maybe allow two tyres besides rain ones, but...

3) Limit the number of mechanics attending the cars at pit stops to maybe 6 or 7, or whatever number would equalize the chances.

4) Finally, with the cars been able to overtake, many of the circuits built in the last 20 years would have to be redesigned and fixed. The stop-and-go Tilke tracks are a joke.

Thanks for the space to express my opinion

Martin Lintott

It is such a disappointment! A new season, good drivers and new pairings and then Bahrain….What a bore. There was not even one attempt at passing.

To think over these years, the money spent on tracks and cars to come up with such a poor outcome is ridiculous. What actual role does the Overtaking working group do? I fear that we are in for a long boring season. There could be rule changes made to spice things up but teams will resist as some will feel that they have the edge on others and won't want to change. The fact is that over this season, all teams will be spending millions on diffusers, aerodynamics etc and none of it will bring a better event. The only short term solutions with tyres etc are all contrived racing. We may as well water down the tracks every event and see what happens. Where is the action, where is the thrill, edge of your seat stuff? If not at Bahrain then I am sure we can write off half the tracks F1 will visit straight away, if not more. I hope I am wrong.

Thomas Buettner

Where do we start after a race weekend of boredom with somewhat predictable results…honestly, there is more excitement at the local Rally Cross events, or even watching the grass grow can be more interesting than the latest edition of the F1 racing season. After following this racing series for more than 20 years and observing all the changes that came along, I can't even express how sad I feel for the younger generation of viewers who have never seen a Tyrell or Lotus racing around Monte Carlo and the enthusiasm surrounding this series in the good old days. If people want to experience this feeling then follow Nicky Lauda's advise - try flying a helicopter in the living room and you'll know what it's like :.

Somehow, the FIA managed once again to restrict the cars to a level of competition that was supposed to display more entertainment but clearly failed to deliver on all accounts, well, besides the safety aspects of course.

Haven't we learned by now that a stand-still in any kind of development is like moving backwards? And that is exactly what F1 has become over the past few years - an obstacle to itself, not capable anymore of showing the world what's possible on a technological level. Car manufacturers around the globe proudly presented us with the features developed from race cars like ABS, traction control and all the other good stuff, now the FIA put a stop to all of that. Can we really blame companies like Honda, BMW or Toyota to pull out from F1? Absolutely not.

It is the human way to constantly explore, develop or invent things that got us to the top of the food chain but now the FIA is telling everyone you have to stop with that. Nonsense!

Someone tell NASA that they can't go exploring anything beyond Mars because it is not affordable and I'm certain that engineers and scientists will find a way.

It is not the same old - same old, it is more like the same old but frozen in time. Yes, I agree, costs had to be addressed to some extend but if we look around today then we still see hundreds of thousands racing enthusiasts spending billions of dollars every year to provide us with real racing and entertainment that is worth every penny.

What ever happened to the Grassroots of motorsport, the Grand Prix? Just rename it into motor-business and we can close this case because the aspect of sport is long gone.

So what I'm trying to say here is simple; let the engineers run with it again and cut down on these silly rules. Give the teams and manufacturers more freedom for development, perhaps restrict the engine displacement but not the amount of cylinders to make it work or even allow a Turbo charger like in earlier years, restrict the amount of aero-dynamic surfaces for the car but not its design or how to allocate it or where to place it.

Stop this insane tire development and get more tire manufacturers on board, one slick tire and one rain tire, period. All these different compounds really don't add enough value to justify their existence, let the driver earn his money by trying to make the tire/car combination work, that will surely separate the boys from the men.

The FIA spend so much time by re-defining their point system to make things more interesting. Rubbish, second place means you lost and the drivers could earn gummy bears for all I care. Now we are down to give the first 10 drivers points but when doing the math by applying this system against the old one then it turns out to make no difference, so what's the point?

What it comes down to is straight forward: the more rules we apply the less racing we'll see, and that's clearly not rocket science.

And by observing other racing series we can conclude that you really don't have to come up with a superior car all the time, smart engineering and a good driver can make things very interesting and display a show that is worth watching. Formula 1, unfortunately, is not in the same universe at the moment so let creativity find its way back into F1 and break down these walls that prevent engineers from doing their job.

J Mayo - Australia

My fan "pedigree" stretches back to watching Moss v Brabham at Ardmore, New Zealand, in the 50's.

Unless Melbourne throws up a RACE, that is it for me. Bernie can go and play in the sand with his toy cars, I will not be watching. There is nothing more to say.

Rafael del Castillo - Mexico

What I'm going to say probably puts me on the same league as Jeremy Clarkson, but anyhow I'm going to say it because I'm tired of excuses. We always blame the tires, or the aerodynamics or the design of the cars, or the huge gap between them… But for me the only culprits are the drivers (and please note that I'm not using the word "racers" and not even "pilots"). The reality is that who can say that Jean Alesi had a good car on his debut year with Tyrrell? Yet he impressed everybody at Monaco on his debut race at that circuit. And who doesn't remember Senna in a Tolemann? Or Damon Hill drive in treacherous rain at Spa with an Arrows? For me current F1 drivers are just a bunch of white collar corporate guys with very little charisma, class, or skills. Much less bravado.

Peter Barnes

It says it all when Nico Rossberg could not overtake Sebastian Vettel's car although it was only firing on 7 cylinders. Hopefully when the teams get more used to the rules and Mclaren let Jenson stay out on his hardly worn tires to try and put in some fast laps rather than pitting him at the same time as the drivers around him then we may get slightly more excitement. I thought it was an interesting point that Martin Brundle made, that the Red Bull could carry 20Kg less fuel and therefore lap up to 4/10th's faster in Bahrain at the start of the race. Wouldn't that be a great reason for manufacturers to make their engines more efficient? Something that could benefit the everyday motorist in the same way the multi valve engine came in after turbo chargers were banned. However Bernie in his infinite wisdom has banned engine development so there is no chance of any developments there. I think there are just too many restrictions on car development which for me take away half the fun and the spirit that is F1.

Ivan Nikoli - Serbia

I have watched F1 for 25 years now, but I am not much older than that. I was very excited waiting for new season to start, and never before followed preseason testing with that intense. On paper, as one said, it should be the best season ever, in reality it is totally opposite. Although I hope season will be still fun in terms of championship battle, races itself are lost case. Nothing can be changed and done over a night.

I am not an expert but I am sure, out there you may find people that can tell exactly why these things are happening. Is it about new sterile tracks made by Mr T, or is it drivers, or cars' aerodynamics? Maybe fine combination of all of that? In my opinion I would start from tracks. Somehow, old-school tracks are providing more fun every season... strange, hm?

If safety measures are reason, than there is nothing anyone may do... you can not endanger human lives for fun of audience. This is not antique Rome.

Solution of mandatory pit stop would change nothing at all. Everybody will stop at pretty much the same time and catch the race at same place where they left it. Maybe, a straw that should hold on to save this season should be soft... very soft tires. Than they will have to change it more often not by regulation but due to law of physics. Drivers will be quicker, they will have more grip and one who knows to save them will have some advantages at certain period of race.

However, F1 was always mixture of business and sport. But now, part that makes it sport is minor. Business ate it all.

Paul Barrow - Oxfordshire

Last year cars with 60kg of fuel were barely able to make their tyres last 20 laps. Last week, with 170kg tyres were lasting three quarters race distance. The answer to this aspect is simple - go back to last year's compounds, or least "soften off" the hard compound of this year. It is good that re-fuelling has gone; it is bogus to claim that it created excitement for it merely increased interest for a couple of times in an otherwise processional race. We all want to see more overtaking and fiddling around the edges by meddling with the race structure will not achieve that. It's been said for years - get rid of the aero!! Or at least reduce it substantially, returning the emphasis to mechanical grip so that the cars have at least a dog's chance of running close together. And if that makes them harder to drive, so what; it's not meant to be easy and what do you expect for 8 million quid a year?

Introducing two mandatory stops for tyres is ridiculous. You may as well make them stop for a sandwich as well! Of course the team bosses want this because, with the exception of clear front runners, they are looking for any means to even themselves with the competition. I believe that there should be variable compounds available without compulsion to use any particular one. Use as many tyres as you want but pay the price for stopping. Each race should have a compound that is capable of lasting the distance structurally, but not necessarily retaining high performance, then the car/driver combinations that can manage this arrangement can do so (or can they on the day?!) whilst the others need to change at least once - it's their evaluation and their call.

Robin Smith

The worse thing about this situation was that pre-season hopes and expectations were high; four WDC is the field, pre-season testing had not really thrown-up a clear favourite, the new points system and new race regulations to name some. To go from that high anticipation to the current low expectations for the rest of the season after just one race is one big mood swing that is reflected from many different quarters of the sport - fans, drivers, team leaders and the whole gamut of the media. Maybe there is a degree of over-reaction and hopes are that the teams were just discovering what the impact of the new regulations were and that having assimilate the lessons will be able to push harder. This said it is hard to dispel the general "doom and gloom" that pervades a lot of people.

F1 is a business but it is a business that relies on money being pumped in and it will not take long for the likes of the sponsors to start shuffling their feet if they start to believe that Bahrain was not a one-off but a template for the rest of the season. I believe that only at that point will the powers that be start to take notice. Until that happens the "take it or leave it" attitude will pervade from Bernie Ecclestone under the guise of don't panic followed by let's wait and see. Up to a point he is right but after China, after four races if the bore-fest continues? I think that would be a mistake. Stay the same for Australia and if we have another processional bore-fest then act straightaway.

I will not go into the details of potential that could be made to improve matters if the on-track entertainment does not pick-up. But I comment that the room for manoeuvre is narrow in that the season is underway, the cars have been built and testing is over so any changes have to be relatively simple and easy to introduce. Major changes in regulations, tackling the lack of overtaking and other such fundamental topics can only be addressed for next season which fills me an uncomfortable feeling for this season.

I will not walk away from the sport after so many years as there have been times like this in the past; and if Bahrain was the barometer for the races to come this season I will grind it out (much like the cars on track). But I hope I will not be thinking "I hope next year will be much better"!

Jim Nissen - Florida, USA

Perhaps the spanking episodes involving Mr Mosely were not sexual in nature but simply due penance for his gross mismanagement of the FIA during his tenure? Look, we have cookie-cutter tracks designed by the designated architect which appeal only to TV producers and their advertisers, if any. The cars have become so equal in performance both in qualifying and in race trim that "racing" has become an oxymoron. If I want to watch a parade of noisy money-suckers I can stand by the freeway and watch tractor-trailers convoy by.

Drivers of the past such as Harry Schell or Innes Ireland could not get a ride in today's market. They were characters. They had personalities. We cared about them and were entertained by their exploits on and off the track. Today's driver has the public personality of Saran wrap. And he is so isolated from public view as to resemble a Transformer toy. Even vaguely controversial opinions are banned (assuming the modern driver has a brain capable of forming an opinion; how would we know?)

Why don't we bring back the "beer can rule" which, simply stated, required that the car when fully laden with race-ready driver, all liquids and what-not must, on the starting grid, permit a beer can to roll transversely from several points beneath the car without touching anything. And spoilers, wings and any other down force inducing add-on can be no larger than the widest available on a mass produced car available to the general public.

Once upon a time the sport was "owned" by "racers" whose sole interest was in winning. And quite possibly selling enough cars or car-related products to survive. Such series still exist but F1 is not one of them. Big business interests own the sport and measure the value of their investment by TV exposure to their rolling bill boards.

A pox on their houses. All of them.

Kevin Joyce - Ireland

Give the new regulations a chance. The teams were finding their feet having never completed a race distance in high temperatures.

Remember the curtain raiser for the 2005 season? Processional race dominated by Fisichella had me questioning why they bothered introducing the single tire rule when the racing was fine in 2004. For the rest of the season we had classic races such as the European, Japanese, and San Marino Grands Prix.

I can't help but wonder if Vettel's spark plug didn't fail we would have had a massive attack from Alonso in the last 10 laps and it would have been a thrilling end and we wouldn't be hearing any of this backfire about the boring race.

Formula One has produced processional racing in the past and will continue to produce it in the future. It's the nature of the sport.

Pat Jeal

This was the first F1 race during which I have honestly fallen asleep.

What is worse, when I woke up and I checked my watch I realised that I'd been sleeping for about half an hour. And the race looked just the same. Same order, same gaps, same procession.

I only hope that the total lack of excitement was at least slightly due to the dreadful circuit, because if all the races this year are going to be like that one then there is no way that the BBC is going to keep the viewing figures which justify the TV Licence payers' expenditure on F1. And awful boring races with advert breaks would be even worse. We might miss the one and only overtake. If there is one.

I can't help wondering if the narrow front tyres are making things even worse. It has always been the lack of front (especially) grip due to slipstream effects which has been blamed for the lack of overtaking attempts. And, unless you are in the lead, there also seems little point in having minimal drag/frontal area if the radiators can't cope with following another car closely enough to try to get by.

Of course this might be a good thing for all those motor racing enthusiasts who will be able to go to Cadwell or Mallory or a hillclimb on Sundays without thinking that they are missing a good F1 race on TV.

This was the first F1 race during which I have honestly fallen asleep.

What is worse, when I woke up and I checked my watch I realised that I'd been sleeping for about half an hour. And the race looked just the same. Same order, same gaps, same procession.

I only hope that the total lack of excitement was at least slightly due to the dreadful circuit, because if all the races this year are going to be like that one then there is no way that the BBC is going to keep the viewing figures which justify the TV Licence payers' expenditure on F1. And awful boring races with advert breaks would be even worse. We might miss the one and only overtake. If there is one.

I can't help wondering if the narrow front tyres are making things even worse. It has always been the lack of front (especially) grip due to slipstream effects which has been blamed for the lack of overtaking attempts. And, unless you are in the lead, there also seems little point in having minimal drag/frontal area if the radiators can't cope with following another car closely enough to try to get by.

Of course this might be a good thing for all those motor racing enthusiasts who will be able to go to Cadwell or Mallory or a hillclimb on Sundays without thinking that they are missing a good F1 race on TV.

Alan Bushell - Victoria BC

"What can one expect when 24 cars start with equal weight, full tanks, same power engines, same tyres..," my friend from Bulgaria asks?

A motor race to break out, I should think! The main thing preventing that from happening seems to be the aero development of today's cars. Racing cars must be able to get close to one another, to pressure, to hound, to harass. Aerodynamics must be restricted or no racing will ever take place.

With regards to the full tanks, I am delighted. One good, durable set of tires for the entire race would be even better. Pit stops are necessary in 500 mile NASCAR races, but are nothing but a gimmick in Formula 1.

When Jackie Stewart pulled in to change his flat tire at Monza and then remarkably drove through the field to regain his place, that was GP racing! But when a driver obeys a tire strategy, and his team manages to disconnect a hose before he drives away... not so much.

Jon Yard

I don't know what race you guys were watching. I thought it was really great . I saw several amazing overtaking manouevres. Schumacher has lost nothing of his former skill as he sythed through the pack... Then I woke up and realised that I had dozed off very soon after the first couple of laps and dreamt the rest!!!!

Ken Peters - Brisbane, Australia

I've watched Round 1 of F1 and Indy Cars. I admit that with Mark Webber coming nowhere, I gave up and went to bed. Indy cars on the other hand, were a delight. An Aussie, Wil Power won but in any case the racing was very close with something going on at all times. Maybe F1 needs to have a look at the rules it makes. After all motor racing is all about racing and apart from the obvious 'driver/car against the clock' there is little wheel to wheel (or even fairly close) racing.

Looking back at F1 races years ago, maybe nothing has changed with drivers winning by minutes and or laps.

You don't necessarily need lots of overtaking - just close racing. We will see what happens in Melbourne, so won't pass judgment on 2010 for a race or two yet. We can only hope things get closer and better.

Graham Godfrey

Isn't the root of this that more regulation leads to less innovation and more uniformity. What we need is less regulation, for example have two compounds, but let people choose which to use and if they want to use only one or both, fine. This would lead to different strategies and more variety. The same goes for aero, engines, etc.

Allow some freedom, allow people to come up with different solutions and you wll get some excitement. For example someone might make a car which was heavy on tyres but had the aerodynamics to run in slipstreams and overtake, someone else might make a diesel easy on tyres which would try for a no stop run. Instead of spending millions to gain a tenth people would be able to use ingenuity and inspiration.

Modern cars are too big, too fast and too sophisticated to return to the "Formula Ford" era of the '60s so uniformity is never going to give good racing. I plead with people to look at Le Mans/LMP regs, not perfect, but at least different cars with different strategies produce great racing.

Warren Beyer

It was worse than bad it was a waste of 100's of millions of $$ and millions of peoples time watching (unless your a Ferrari Fan) I'm 59 and listened to the Indy 500 with my Dad when I was 10. I've watched all of the F1 races televised and for 5 years, seems like 10, I keep waiting for a race to break out. It's now a BORING Technical Exercise, the driver a redundant part. Save the weight and drive them from the pits but don't expect people to watch it.

Build cars with small wings, no exotic brakes, gear boxes, paddle shifters or pit box telemetry. They need flat bottoms, 3.5L normally aspirated engines, a gear box with a selector lever, big sticky tires that wear out and small fuel tanks. Race on track that encourage passing with allot of runoff so the drivers are willing to take chances. Use gravity feed refueling and no more than 7 guys over the wall

Bring the driver and crews ability and performance back to F1, it will be a hell of a show and people will watch it.

Ali Roberts

I was massively unimpressed by Sunday's race. However, it wasn't the worse I've seen as I remained interested in what might still happen before the end. It was still kind of new; some drivers' tyres could still go, other drivers might push for final lap overtaking manoeuvres. None of that happened. In the end the only thing that kept it edgy for me was hoping Rosberg (one of my favourites) would get Vettel before the chequered flag.

From what I've read since, it seems tyres are unlikely to go. That leaves... I don't know - maybe only the hope of spins, technical failures and bad weather. Is this all the fault of the ban on refuelling? No, I don't think so. I think the rot set in long before that. Races at the Hungaroring, Valencia, Abu Dhabi, even Monaco have long been snooze fests. Wheel to wheel, overtaking racing seems to have diminished in the 15 years I've been following the sport. I'm no technical expert but those who are, blame the aerodynamics.

The only solution to improve racing therefore has to be to ditch all the politics and worrying about being PC (green/economical etc) and have a root and branch change of the rules to allow cars to be built to be the fastest racing cars they can be and let them race other fast cars on tracks that are up to the task - not just pretty backdrops to a 2 hour parade lap. Sadly, I'm not optimistic anyone with any power has the will to change the status quo; it'll just be more dicking about at the edges, as usual.

John De Quincey

Same old, same old. Not worth posting a comment no-one in F1 is listening. I shall not watch any races (sorry processions) live, back to recording them, watch the first few laps then x32 and watch the last lap. Just occasionally changing from x32 to play for the odd incident. Thank goodness for MotoGP, pity the BBC doesn't show the BSB and WSB live, I would not miss those.

Daniel Kelly

Banning refueling was one of a list of 'fixes' that was commonly asked for by fans in order to improve the show. However the first race of the season has shown that clearly it wasn't enough.

There is a degree of knee jerking going on, in that we've only had 1 race of the season so far, at a track that has produced dull races whatever the rules. We may well come away from Melbourne in 2 weeks time having witnessed a classic... I won't hold my breath, but it could happen.

People are already calling for a mandatory second pitstop, but I don't think that will help in the slightest. Introducing a mandatory pit stop is as bad if not worse than the requirement to use both tire compounds in the race... I don't like it one bit. The lack of pit stops is not the problem. Nor is the ban on refueling. These things have merely highlighted problems that have been around for years. We all know the list, but just to be clear, here it is again.

Aerodynamics that stifle overtaking - Banning wheel hubs is a step in the right direction, but whilst the 'double' 'triple' or 'super' diffusers continue to develop unchecked, things are only going to get worse.

Standardized Engines - If all the cars have engines with the same power and same rev limit, is it any wonder that mechanical grip is unable to overcome the aero? So long as the FIA continues to strangle development in this area, things will not get better. I understand that in these times of environmental and financial concerns that components need to be built to last and not be thrown away, but surely we can have development AND engines that can be reused?

Scalextic Tracks - I'm not some 'old fart', I'm 26, but it's clear to me that these modern tracks aren't doing the job. In the old days, you'd find an interesting section of road, or an old air field, and you'd turn it into a track. The natural landmarks and terrain, would form the character and dare I say it, 'challenge', of the circuit. These days, you find a big bit of open land with no landmark, in a country where you think you can make money, you call Mr Tilke, and you pay him a large amount of money (usually government money) to build a track with a huge straight with a hairpin at the end of it, no real land marks, challenges or character, and then build huge luxurious hospitality and PR facilities in which to woo rich business men... and if the drivers hit a bump they don't like, well we can iron that out... Ok, Mr Tilke has come up with the excitingly named 'Turn 8' in turkey, but what else? Is he the ONLY man in the world who can design a racing circuit? I doubt it. Why not let someone else have a go?

I don't want to be completely negative. There have been SOME positive rule changes, such as the banning of driver aids, the return to slick tires, etc. But it seems that the FIA gives with one hand, and takes away with the other. For every positive change they make, a negative one is made that completely negates it.

Roger Fyfe

Another year of Tilktedium in prospect.

I reached for my MS Excel level 3 revision book by the time they had done a couple of circuits. The other half had already gone to the kitchen to make some more marmalade.

Happy days

Alastair Neaves - Dunedin, New Zealand

Many people have no time for Max Mosley but he might have pushed through some serious change.I have no confidence in anybody associated with the teams making the required changes.

There should be a standard front wing with a standard angle of attack. There could be adjustable flaps for a degree of tuning and the profile would be such that these would stall if given too much angle. This serious reduction of downforce at the front would start to extend the braking areas through lower cornering speeds and less grip during braking. The next step is to reduce the braking power.

With the tyre supply up for tender this could be an opportunity for real change . Make the tyres last the race . These harder tyres should produce less marbles off line giving greater chance of a car passing and also further extend stopping distances as above. If a tyre was damaged or abnormal wear caused a problem allowing only one person to work on wheel changing per car and if necessary have 5 stud wheels with one person again so that teams would not use tyre stops as a performance advantage.

Tyre stops don't really contributed much to the race. The time should be very similar for everybody as they all do the same job. With fuel stops with a limited flow rate there is/was some variation in stop length due to the amount of fuel being taken on.

The working groups and constructors associations just fiddle with the details. Perhaps a retired expert or experts can make the required changes.

Richard Oax

I have been a life long F1 fan - I have to say that this season looks ideal for sky + owners.

The build up and qualifying far more exciting than the racing. Can this be right and ultimately I will switch off altogether!

The race was a total bore - even to me it appears that the dramas of tyre wear and cars swapping the lead arent going to happen.

The value in this sport is consumer buying power for the sponsors products - how long will they stay associated with a boring procession?

Louis-Philippe Maisonneuve - Quebec, Canada

Formula One is the pinnacle of motorsport. So why is the motor the same for everyone; 2.3L V8 (F-1 is not Indy racing or Nascar). They should put a maximum horsepower that they can't go over. That would bring it back like in the old days. We'll see 4, 6, 8, 10 cylinders engine with turbos, superchargers, both or N/A. This would push for more engine research and each team would be different. It would also invite more manufacturers to get involved.

Remember the last 3 laps of race between Gilles Villeneuve and René Arnoux; turbo vs n/a.

And another thing: Bridgestone should leave F-1. When Michelin came back, they had wide front tires. They outperformed Bridgestone. So they did the same to be more competitive. Now Michelin is gone, Bridgestone went back to their old ways. So does the smaller front tires prevent more aggressive cornering or overtaking ??

Andy Green

IS IT ME ???????

F1 has for almost 35 years been top of my sport must watch list, either on tele or live at a circuit. I was at Club corner when Mansell was stopped by the crowd in '92, I was at the Donington chicane for Senna's best ever race, I saw Lewis in qualifying at Silverstone in 2007 when the crowd took the roof off. I have been to Goodwood & Coy's to see all the classic cars & drivers and also tyre tests and demonstration events. I used to invite friends over for an F1 party and stay up all night to watch the first race in Australia. I have spent hours reading video / PVR manuals so I could record practice, qualifying and races while I had to be at work or when my wife threatened divorce if I didn't take the family out for lunch on a Sunday.

I have seen every race televised since the late seventies, therefore I consider myself a pretty avid fan and reasonably knowledgeable on the subject.

Having watched the first race at Bahrain one thing struck me more than anything else, why do those in control seem intent on killing the sport we love......???? The build up to the first race was fantastically exiting, teams trading times in testing, Shumi's return, new teams and the prospect of all the cars being filled with top line talent ready for the closest dogfight in the championship possibly ever.

What did we get? A rather dull, flat, damp squib of a race where my interest was tested to the limit. I was left to will on one of the new teams to get a car across the line, or hope that Lewis's heroic driving style could overcome the car characteristics and overtake someone, he did, but it had nothing to do with outbraking anybody.

Now don't get me wrong I do not expect four abreast Formula Ford races every weekend but (and it's a big BUT!) I did watch all of the GP2 Asia races over the winter and they were brilliant. Lots of overtaking and some stellar driving. Now here is the thing, GP2 races at the same venues as F1 on the same weekends, people in F1 watch from the pitwall and most F1 drivers have driven in GP2... You can see where this is going right. How do they not get it ?? IS IT JUST ME???

GP2 use powerful single seaters with V8's, wings & slicks and employ an early tyre stop, yet the racing is usually very entertaining with battles up and down the field.

Discuss.!!!!!!!

Again I have been an F3000 / GP2 fan for years I've been to lots of races (Birmingham superprix - genius) and over the last few seasons the racing has been great. Who can forget Lewis Hamilton at Silverstone in 2006 overtaking two into Becketts or his comeback from the back after an early spin in Turkey to finish second, or the two isport cars crashing out at the start, from the front row at Magny Cours.

Ok, so everyone uses the same car allowing the driver to shine and the best teams still usually end up at the front, but not always and at least with a reversed grid in the second race it is a lottery for the quick driver / team to have a clean race thus keeping the interest level high.

F1 is on a cost cutting mission allegedly or at least R. Branson hopes, thus equalising the teams resources more than for a very long time. I say, make them look at what makes GP2 work and upscale that for F1.

If it means all teams are given drawings to build a standard car that's fine by me. It keeps people employed (the reduced number cost cutting is aimed at) in the factories and equalises performance better than any other means. Big teams employ the best people to gain an unfair advantage over all the others, reduce this by getting back to racing not worrying about wind tunnel numbers ie the best driver / set up will be at the front & mistakes will be punished. At the moment Vettel can make a mistake in qualifying and still be at the front.

When it comes to manufacturers who need to be winning to justify the spend this works even better as most teams will have reasonable results during a season (wins and podiums) therefore avoiding embarrassing failure like Toyota who spent literally billions going nowhere very fast. So much easier to justify if you can say that a given team narrowly missed out on the title rather than missed by miles.

Finally, I am a karter and have always enjoyed the three heats and a final format, why not use this in F1. Random grids for the three short heats replacing Q1, Q2 and Q3 the results determining your grid slot for the main event. Thus creating instant entertainment and avoiding the fastest car always being at the front.

Motor racing can be totally exiting and enthralling but F1 currently is like watching paint dry, which is exactly what my wife would rather I was doing at the weekend.

So come on F1 before you lose even your most diehard of fans...

Article from Pitpass (http://www.pitpass.com):

Published: 16/03/2010
Copyright © Pitpass 2002 - 2024. All rights reserved.