O MIO DIO. Ho appena letto le altre cose ratificate oggi. Siamo alla FOLLIA più totale. Quoto
Ma sono deficienti per dio? Come lo tieni il bilanciamento di prestazioni tra macchine che sottostanno a differenti regole tecniche? Che teste di cazzo colossali. Ma neanche un cercopiteco con l'Alzheimer avrebbe concepito un'idea così idiota.2010 Formula One Regulations
Budgets
As an alternative to running under the existing rules, which are to remain stable until 2012, all teams will have the option to compete with cars built and operated within a stringent cost cap.
The cost cap is £30m (currently approximately €33 or $42m). This figure will cover all expenditure of any kind. Anything subsidised or supplied free will be deemed to have cost its full commercial value and rigorous auditing procedures will apply.
To enable these cars to compete with those from teams which are not subject to cost constraints, the cost-capped cars will be allowed greater technical freedom.
The principal technical freedoms allowed are as follows:
1. A more aerodynamically efficient (but standard) under body.
2. Movable wings.
3. An engine which is not subject to a rev limit or a development freeze.
The FIA has the right to adjust elements of these freedoms to ensure that the cost-capped cars have neither an advantage nor a disadvantage when compared to cars running to the existing rules.
Bah. L'unica regola decente è questa:
Ce lo vedo Raikkonen ad obbedire, buhahahahAny driver retiring before the end of the race must make himself available for media interviews after his return to the paddock.
edit: commenti sensati alla proposta, se non sapete l'inglese estinguetevi.
OMG!! The horror. :banghead:
Basically Bernie could have a public poll asking if we wanted everyone in Halloween costumes on the podium, we`d all (90% or more) vote no and he`d still push and get it anyway.
Makes me feel like an ass for watching it and hoping for reasonable changes.
* The notion that this will increase overtaking is wishful thinking. When one team is dominant at a circuit, no changes to the points system is going to make a third or fourth place driver in an inferior car capable of reaching first or second. Furthermore, for cars below fourth/fifth place what incentive is there to do any overtaking?
* It doesn't reward consistency. Ecclestone may have a point in saying that the current system is weighted too much in favour of consistent drivers rather than winners but you don't solve that by going to the opposite extreme. A slight adjustment to the points system could easily solve this; such as making it 12 points for a win rather than 10.
* This does nothing to prove who the best driver is; it instead puts even more weight on the technical side of the sport. Drivers in inferior cars but with immense talent wouldn't stand a chance under this system.
* Stewards decisions will be more costly. Massa would have won the championship because of a stewards decision if this system was in place last year. It wouldn't have been a contributory factor as would have been the case had Massa won the championship in Brazil, but the reason for his title. Until we get more consistency in decisions, any system which increases the possibility of a championship being won off the track shouldn't be considered.
* How is this consistent with Bernie wanting to cut costs in the sport? If the only way of getting any reward is to finish in the top three the middle-teams will go for broke. Either that or they'll pack up and leave for good.
* Introducing one driver teams. Obviously the results will be fixed from the start while giving all the emphasis to one driver. More often than not one driver is allowed to win only if the lead driver retires from the race. Maybe they can fight for the first win, but the one who gets that, is the man.
* Introducing more mechanical DNF. Unsafe for drivers. It's enough if you win every third race, so you can take the components to the extreme which are intended to last only one race. lost of DNFs-no action on track.
This rewards inconsistency and luck.
Error free drivers, in less than best car, have no chance at all.
Widening the gap between points awarded for first and second would have done that fine and still given consistency a (reduced) chance of succeeding. Doing things the way they are means that a guy who wins 5 and spins off every other race could beat a guy who wins one less but is always on the podium to the title, which is just wrong.
This decision is political.
Someone needed to show FOTA who's boss.
That's how these silly games hurt the sport and piss off the fans.
They haven't learned a thing. Max and Bernie should get the hell out of here. Max licked Bernies ass once more.
The 12-9-7... system FOTA suggested was perfect because it gave the win more value and gave consistency drivers a chance also.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Emma
