[Rules] 14 teams next year?

[duke_toaster]

This would need permission from all the teams, but according to Autosport - linky at http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78656 - the FIA could allow 28 cars if there aren't any more pullouts. Would that be a problem with track licencing? I for one think they should be let in as a reserve, and if no-one quits there's no reason to have two cars not racing ...

[F.O.F.]

It will be great to see if it happens and I don't think there's any tracks that couldn't handle it...Monaco? Spa maybe?
Maybe they just don't want to say that they're going to put Renault over a barrel next week and fully expect them to head for the hills.

[duke_toaster]

Spa has the pit lane that runs from Bus Stop to La Source, and another one that runs from La Source to after Eau Rouge ... perhaps there (if necessary that is, they could just give them less boxes each) they could enter at Bus Stop, have most of the teams at the first pit lane and one or two in the 24 hour pit lane? Then end the speed limit zone a few hundred metres after the last garage, so it wouldn't be a huge penalty.

[jab]

Spa gets over 100 entries for the Fun Cup race every year. Although that does include the old pits as well, I really can't see it being a problem. They'll just have to distribute the garages differently. Most of the teams get more than 1 as it is anyway

[racer69]

How about 28 cars going for 26 grid slots??

[duke_toaster]

That would basically mean 13 teams as the slowest team would go bust like MasterCard Lola in all likelyhood.

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by racer69

How about 28 cars going for 26 grid slots??

Well I supppose we'll get two DNQ's every weekend. Can't see the new teams agreeing to that though, assuming they'd be the most likely non-qualifiers.

Good news though - personally I'd love it if we had 39 entries like in 1989...

[jab]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

That would basically mean 13 teams as the slowest team would go bust like MasterCard Lola in all likelyhood.

Exactly. The whole prequalifying/DNQing idea is flawed. F1 became oversaturated in the late 80s/early 90s which led to the death of many teams because they just couldn't get to the races

In theory, it would be wonderful, but in practice, it wouldn't be viable

[the sniper]

I think the FIA have let in a '14th' entry in because they know either USF1 won't make it or Mosley's already span the wheel of FIA punishments and Benetton are being shown the door.

I can't see a 28 grid happening due to circuit licenses, garage space (the team were already upset about there being 13 teams in the pit lane, why would they agree to 14?) and the amount of traffic problems that would occur in both qualifying and the race. The last problem will not really be due to the number of cars (except Monaco and maybe Singapore), but it will be due to the pace, or lack of it, of the new team's cars which will be a cause for concern, especially as I believe the 107% rule doesn't exist in F1 anymore.

I would like to have seen a more 'jazzed up' version of Pre-qualifying on the Friday of a GP. They're always going on about bringing some competition to Fridays, this would be perfect. It would have meant they could have given Ntechnology and SovietGP a chance, getting rid of those pesky court cases.

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by jab

Exactly. The whole prequalifying/DNQing idea is flawed. F1 became oversaturated in the late 80s/early 90s which led to the death of many teams because they just couldn't get to the races

In theory, it would be wonderful, but in practice, it wouldn't be viable

I think the main problem back in the pre-qualifying days of the late '80's - early '90's was that the actual pre-qualifying process was flawed, rather than the concept itself. The cars that had to pre-qualify were determined on a biannual basis, and this was then reviewed at mid season. That meant you had strong teams like Brabham and Onyx in '89 or Jordan in '91 being forced to prequalify for half the season when it was clear they should automatically go into qualifying. If the system had been reviewed on a race by race basis it would have worked a lot better.

[jab]

I don't think it was just that. Think about it this way - start with a default 10 teams, as we have done this year:

- if we have 3-4 new teams, all racing in every race (not DNQing), that gives us 13-14 serious teams on the grid with decent funding, with the potential to last many years

- if we have 8 new teams, but only the original 10 guaranteed a place on the grid, who's going to sponsor the teams that aren't necessarily going to make it? Sponsors can't tell the difference between Prodrive and Stefan GP, but they do know that they may not get the exposure of being races and won't sponsor the teams. So you end up with 5 or 6 of those (including serious teams with potential to be good teams in the long term) going bust almost immediately and you end up with less teams in the long run

It works in NASCAR because it doesn't cost much to set up a NASCAR team, and even if a few teams go bust it's no big deal because there will always be more out there - even in the current financial situation, Sprint Cup races have seen nearly 50 entries consistently. But F1's a totally different ballgame - it just wouldn't be sustainable

[nycuk]

Yes, we have 13 or 14 new teams who are (or appear to be) well funded, but as we know there were other apparently well funded teams such as Prodrive, Epsilon Euskadi, maybe even Superfund or Lola, who didn't get an entry for next year. So if there was no limit to the amount of teams that are granted an entry we could have had 17 or 18 financially healthy teams in 2010. Investors are obviously out there.

Sponsors get a lot more global TV coverage than they did 20 years ago (televised qualifying etc) which in turn offers greater value to a sponsor, whether the car is a front runner or not. The whole sponsorship (or 'partnership', if you're Ron Dennis) concept has changed immeasurably since then. Branson and Hurley know that Manor and USF1 won't be winning races next year, and (if there are 14 teams) may even fail to qualify on occasion, but they still want to be a part of it. I believe it's the association with F1 as a brand that appeals to sponsors, as much as having your logo on a winning car.

[GTRMagic]

This presumes Renault keeps operating

[ECW Dan Selby]

Originally Posted by nycuk

Yes, we have 13 or 14 new teams who are (or appear to be) well funded, but as we know there were other apparently well funded teams such as Prodrive, Epsilon Euskadi, maybe even Superfund or Lola, who didn't get an entry for next year. So if there was no limit to the amount of teams that are granted an entry we could have had 17 or 18 financially healthy teams in 2010. Investors are obviously out there.

Sponsors get a lot more global TV coverage than they did 20 years ago (televised qualifying etc) which in turn offers greater value to a sponsor, whether the car is a front runner or not. The whole sponsorship (or 'partnership', if you're Ron Dennis) concept has changed immeasurably since then. Branson and Hurley know that Manor and USF1 won't be winning races next year, and (if there are 14 teams) may even fail to qualify on occasion, but they still want to be a part of it. I believe it's the association with F1 as a brand that appeals to sponsors, as much as having your logo on a winning car.

If pre-qualifying was televised, I think you're right, the situation would be somewhat different.

But by the same token I would have thought consistantly not qualifying would eventually lead to withdrawal.

Selby

[jab]

Originally Posted by nycuk

Branson and Hurley know that Manor and USF1 won't be winning races next year, and (if there are 14 teams) may even fail to qualify on occasion,

No, they don't. Hurley is different because his motives remain a mystery, but Branson will have bought into Manor on the proviso that they'll race in every race, because the rules don't accomodate prequalifying anymore and haven't done for years. I very much doubt Branson would pump this much money into a team if he knew there was a chance they may not qualify for the races. It's the same for any sponsor in this day and age - Mallya wouldn't have bought Spyker as a platform for Kingfisher and his booze brands, Mateschitz wouldn't have bought his teams, and even the manufacturers wouldn't have entered

Look at NASCAR - the teams that aren't guaranteed starting spots don't have big sponsors. Some don't even have sponsors at all. Because even in NASCAR, investors don't want to risk it, and I should think they'd be paying far far less to sponsor most NASCAR teams than an F1 backmarker. Even well-known teams like Petty Enterprises and Yates Racing have been absorbed into bigger teams because they can't find the sponsorship to keep them going - even a famous name isn't enough to attract investment, let alone little minnows that no one's ever heard of

Even if you look at the teams that did enter under prequalifying in the 80s/90s, most of the people running them were nuts, like Sassetti, van Rossem and Monteverdi. Thankfully, the sort of money needed to enter F1 these days is out of the reach of the likes of them. The only other teams that were around were former junior teams that went up the ranks too quickly and went out of their means, like Forti, Pacific and Onyx. Again, you can't do that today because the gap is too wide between F1 and other series. So no one would bother entering

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

This presumes Renault keeps operating

I wouldn't be surprised, if they get sold and he doesn't get banned, if Flav buys it. Then again, imagine it gets bought out by Piquet Sports ...

[jab]

I can't imagine the Renault team not being bought tbh. Toyota may be a different matter, though

[Andrew2001]

Guys, I don't think any of teh current teams would think that they would not qualify....I mean, tell me who is the slowest? Force India clearly have speed, Toro Rosso have been quick in places, Toyota were very good in the first half of the year, I think there could bea variety of teams not qualifying in places.

I have two requests for '10:
1. The Force India and Brawn cars have Powered by Mercedes Benz on the air boxes (what domination! Love it!)
2. Heidfeld gets the drive along side Button at Brawn, I have been wantin to see him in a top car for so many years

Roll on 2010.

[Wims]

I thought Heidfeld was in a top car last year. He didnt exactly impress me

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Andrew2001

Guys, I don't think any of teh current teams would think that they would not qualify....I mean, tell me who is the slowest? Force India clearly have speed, Toro Rosso have been quick in places, Toyota were very good in the first half of the year, I think there could bea variety of teams not qualifying in places.

The issue is the new teams. If one of the teams needs a bit of time to get going they will turn up to weekends as lambs to the slaughter and never get any decent TV publicity. They're new teams with an unproven engine, they need time to develop rather than an initial crushing. That's why I vote no to any pre-qualifying system unless absolutely necessary. If it is absolutely necessary (possibly Monaco, otherwise not really) I think that pre-qualifying should not be done in the previous way - perhaps have two semi-final races?

[Jamesy-18]

Originally Posted by Wim Sjøholm

I thought Heidfeld was in a top car last year. He didnt exactly impress me

Well, he certainly out performed Kubica towards the end of the season :P.

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by jab

No, they don't. Hurley is different because his motives remain a mystery, but Branson will have bought into Manor on the proviso that they'll race in every race, because the rules don't accomodate prequalifying anymore and haven't done for years. I very much doubt Branson would pump this much money into a team if he knew there was a chance they may not qualify for the races.

14 teams = 28 cars = 2 DNQ's. There is every possibility that one of the new teams (Manor included) will be one of those DNQ's. The rules haven't accomodated pre-qualifying for years because there's been no need when there's only been 20 - 24 cars entered for a Grand Prix. There's no need for pre-qualifying unless there are 30 cars or more.

There's no proviso or guarantee that Manor will take part in every race if this is the case, how can there be?; if there are 28 cars aiming for 26 starting postions two are going to miss out; if that's not what Branson signed up for then he's going to be disappointed if his cars are amongst the DNQ's.

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

If pre-qualifying was televised, I think you're right, the situation would be somewhat different.

But by the same token I would have thought consistantly not qualifying would eventually lead to withdrawal.

Selby

Agreed. If you're consistantly not qualifying then you deserve no place in F1. Step forward Life, Andrea Moda, Eurobrun et al.

[TheMong]

ans can also kiss goodbye to the 3rd car that ferrari are hoping to introduce lol

[jab]

Originally Posted by nycuk

14 teams = 28 cars = 2 DNQ's.

That's why they're changing the rules so that 28 cars can start a race. Otherwise, Sauber will be on the sidelines - they're only a reserve at this stage