Future of Formula One

The future of Formula One is a much-speculated area of interest in the world of motor sport. There is always uncertainty about the future of the sport, and disagreements about the direction in which Formula One should progress both in the general public and within the governing body itself.

Formula One went through a difficult time in the early 2000s. Television ratings dropped, and many fans simply switched off. This was largely attributed to Ferrari's dominance from 2000 to 2004, a period in which Michael Schumacher won the World Championship for five years in a row. The massive commercial interests of car companies and team sponsors are also at odds with the demand for an exciting spectator sport as the drivers are encouraged to reduce risk to satisfy the funders.Other factors include the use of driver aids supposedly taking the skill away from the driver and putting it in the hands of the mechanics. Furthermore, many of the smaller teams such as Minardi and Jordan found themselves subject to takeovers as they struggled to keep up with the high cost of the sport. For this reason many rule changes have been proposed for the future.

The thinking behind rule changes

There are several key areas that determine changes to the rules of Formula One.

Safety

Following the deaths of Roland Ratzenberger and Ayrton Senna at the San Marino Grand Prix in 1994, safety has been an important motive for rule changes. The FIA see limiting speeds as essential, and it is now common for there to be a radical overhaul of the rules every few years in an attempt to cut speeds. Inevitably, engineers find new ways to make cars as fast as they were before, leading to a perpetual cycle.

Cost-cutting

The announcement at the end of the 2004 season that Ford (former owner of Jaguar Racing) would pull out of Formula One is seen as evidence of the need to cut the cost of running a Formula One team.

It has long been a task of the FIA to try and reduce costs via regulations, to allow smaller, privately-funded teams to be able to compete with manufacturer-run teams. However, many believe that rather than reducing costs, rule changes may actually lead to an increase in costs, as bigger teams such as Mclaren Mercedes and Scuderia Ferrari spend large amounts of money on research to find legal ways around the new regulations. This often leads the smaller teams to an even larger disadvantage than before.

Excitement for Fans

Many would also like to see drivers demonstrate more skill on the track. Some believe that it would be silly to have road cars that are more technically advanced than Formula One cars. However, most now agree that getting rid of electronic driver aids would be a good way to increase the excitement of Formula One. The format of the sport is also a hot topic, and there is always talk of changing the format of qualifying. Another area that is often discussed is the balance between ease of overtaking and the level of strategy that is required with many people arguing that the balance in recent years has been too much toward strategy.

Relevance to the Motor Industry

Recently, the focus of changes is moving towards making the research and development that goes into Formula One more relevant to the motor industry in general.cite news | url =http://formula-1.updatesport.com/news/article/1165665261/formula_one/F1headlines/Future-rules-proposed-in-Monaco/view.html | title =Future Rules Proposed in Monaco | publisher = UpdateF1.com |date=2006-12-09 | accessdate =2006-12-11|] This is in response to the increased involvement of major car manufacturers in place of tobacco sponsored independent teams. Through the GPMA, the car manufacturers have been able to put pressure on the FIA to force the direction of changes to the sport.

Environment

Concern for the sport's image may also see changes to address the sport's environmentally unfriendly image. Use of technologies such as bio-fuel and regenerative braking would also allow the sport to maintain its reputation for being a high-technology sport that takes a leading role with respect to research.

Technical regulations

The desire to increase safety, improve the racing spectacle and reduce costs to help smaller teams mean that changes to the technical regulations are regularly proposed and implemented by the FIA. Unfortunately, there are often trade-offs to be made: for example reducing wings would make overtaking easier and potentially improve the racing but the wings provide a lot of space for sponsors to display their logos. Along these lines, one recent FIA proposal was to have a split rear wing. [ [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=aT4_0uPwjwvI&refer=uk Bloomberg.com news UK "F-1 Plans to Reshape Cars, Have Knockout Qualifying".] Retrieved on 23 March 2007.]

Qualifying

In recent years there have been a number of changes to qualifying, often designed to create a more mixed-up grid to make the race more exciting. The traditional format of a one hour qualifying session with each driver allowed twelve laps was exciting but suffered from the fact that the track was often empty for the first half of the session. The 'one lap' format (whereby each driver had one lap on an empty track to set his qualifying time with no refueling allowed between qualifying and the race) was criticized by both teams and broadcasters for being boring. However, the bosses of smaller teams liked the guaranteed television exposure for their sponsors. A revised format for 2005 using aggregate times from two qualifying sessions was also unpopular with teams, fans and broadcasters due to fans refusing to give away so much of their time on the weekend to Formula 1. The system of two sessions was abandoned mid-season at the 2005 European Grand Prix.

The current 'knock-out' system, which was first used for the 2006 season, sees a partial return to the traditional format but with six cars eliminated after each of two initial sessions leaving 10 cars to fight for pole in a final 10-minute shootout (as of 2008). [ [http://www.crash.net/uk/en/news_view.asp?cid=1&nid=121280 News on crash.net] Retrieved on 23 March 2007] This system has generally been well received but there are a number of criticisms that may result in minor adjustments being made to the system.

* The system is overly complex, especially with the rules and tactics being essentially different for the final session.
* As lap times can not be carried forward from one session to another, the battle for pole occurs in the last minutes instead of being throughout the full session. It also makes it harder to see which drivers are at risk of elimination in the second session because the list shown by the television coverage typically consists of fast drivers that have yet to set a lap.

Politics

Often, politics takes precedent ahead of sport in Formula One. For many years teams have threatened to set up a breakaway series, known as Grand Prix World Championship (GPWC). In the immediate aftermath of the 2005 United States Grand Prix there appeared to be an almost irreconcilable split between teams and the FIA. Ferrari in particular appeared to be politically isolated, partly due to perceived close links with the FIA. There were many calls, particularly from Minardi boss Paul Stoddart, for FIA President Max Mosley to resign.

Ferrari became the first team to sign an extension of the Concorde Agreement to race in Formula One after 2007. Ferrari and the FIA had come up with proposed regulations for 2008 onwards. Meanwhile the other teams were threatening to set up GPWC in 2008. However, fledgling teams Red Bull Racing and Force India F1 (formerly Midland F1 who were still known as Jordan Grand Prix at the time) joined with Ferrari by signing the Concorde Agreement soon afterwards.

Drivers, in the form of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association also had a run-in with the FIA. There was said to have been a split between Michael Schumacher and the rest of the GPDA. A meeting about safety between drivers and Max Mosley was called off after comments that David Coulthard allegedly made.

More recently the 2005 United States Grand Prix has been seen as a wake-up call for all sides, and there has apparently been increasing consensus between teams. There has been little mention of GPWC, with the manufacturers beginning to use more moderate language and referring to themselves as the Grand Prix Manufacturers' Association (GPMA). There is said to be a lot of common ground between the FIA's proposed regulations and the teams' proposals [http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=33899&PO=33899] . The meeting between the drivers and Max Mosley also went ahead and was said to be useful.

Future proposals

FIA proposals

Max Mosley, the head of the FIA has come up with ideas for reducing the cost, danger and technicality of the sport. New regulations and rules proposed for the future include:
* Reductions in testing time
* Standard parts such as brake discs

Team bosses and FIA President Max Mosley met in Monaco on May 4, 2004 to discuss the proposed changes; the bosses unanimously approved the plan, effective in 2008.

Teams' proposals

On the weekend of the 2004 Brazilian Grand Prix, team bosses met to discuss the future of Formula One. Nine out of the ten team bosses (that is all of them, except that of Scuderia Ferrari) agreed to take part in an eighteenth and nineteenth race (i.e. the French Grand Prix and the British Grand Prix) if cost-cutting measures were introduced. Normally, the teams would need to be compensated in order to compete in more than seventeen races per season. The teams called for:
* A reduction in testing to just ten days per season
* The elimination of tyre testing

The teams' plea for a reduction in testing to just ten days per season is significant as Ferrari, who have an advantage over other teams due to their owning their own private test circuits, are very much opposed to reductions in testing.

Fans' proposals

During the 2005 Formula One season the FIA, in partnership with AMD and F1 Racing, launched a survey on the internet in a bid to find out what the fans wanted from Formula One. The response was so huge that many fans had trouble submitting their views because the website had "collapsed under the sheer weight of users" [http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=24516] .

The [http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2005/July/070705-01.html results of the survey] showed that a massive 94% of fans would like to see more overtaking in Formula One, and only 15% thought that the sport "incorporate [d] the right balance of technology and driver skill."

To address the fans' concerns, the FIA adopted AMD as its "official technology partner" [http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2005/September/020905-02.html] . AMD will supply the FIA with a powerful computer that "could run a number of programs which would be equivalent to crews testing with two F1 cars" [http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4209794.stm] . This will help the FIA to draw up new aerodynamic regulations for 2008, in the hope of producing closer racing.

Circuit design

. Such a move would have two major effects. First, by including numerous famous landmarks it makes the courses more visually stimulating. Second, it would broaden the range of skills demanded of Formula One drivers, shaking the domination of drivers who have perfected the art of track driving.

Safety, of drivers and of historic landmarks on the circuits, remains a tricky issue. Therefore, circuits like those designed by Hermann Tilke, such as Shanghai International Circuit, remain in favour. Tilke's designs are said to encourage overtaking, due to their characteristic long straights followed by tight corners. The brand new Istanbul Racing Circuit, designed by Tilke, proved popular amongst drivers and spectators alike, and has already been compared to the great circuits. The circuit's Turn 8 (an incredible long, fast corner which has four apexes) in particular has been compared to other great corners such as Eau Rouge. [http://www.formula-1-racing.com/istanbul-park-circuit.html]

Grands Prix

Bernie Ecclestone is keen to move Formula One into new markets to improve the sport's worldwide appeal. Possible venues for future grands prix include:

* Africa
** flagicon|Egypt Cairo, Egypt [http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/147300/ecclestone-signals-venue-changes]
** flagicon|Morocco Marrakech, Morocco [http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/147300/ecclestone-signals-venue-changes]
** flagicon|South Africa Cape Town, South Africa [http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15608.html]

* Americas
** flagicon|Argentina San Luis, Argentina [http://www.girlstalksports.com/Motor-Sports/Formula-One/Formula-One-may-return-to-Argentina-20051026201/]
** flagicon|Mexico Cancún, Mexico [http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns13758.html]
** flagicon|United States Indianapolis, United States [http://eurosport.yahoo.com/07032008/58/indy-return-2009.html]

* Asia
** flagicon|Iran Kish Island, Iran [http://f1.gpupdate.net/nl/nieuws/2005/05/18/ook-iran-richt-vizier-op-formule-1]
** flagicon|Kazakhstan Astana, Kazakhstan [http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns16287.html]
** flagicon|Lebanon Beirut, Lebanon [http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/147300/ecclestone-signals-venue-changes]
** flagicon|Qatar Doha, Qatar [http://www.sportinglife.com/formula1/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=formula1/08/03/26/AUTO_Qatar.html]
** flagicon|Indonesia Jakarta, Indonesia

* Europe
** flagicon|Austria Spielberg, Austria [http://www.usgpindy.com/news/story.php?story_id=1349]
** flagicon|Bulgaria Kavarna, Bulgaria [http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns17463.html]
** flagicon|Czech Republic Prague, Czech Republic [http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/18/czech-grand-prix-prague-the-latest-potential-f1-race-venue/]
** flagicon|France Paris, France [http://theracingline.net/index.php?]
** flagicon|Greece Orchomenos, Greece [http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15536.html]
** flagicon|Poland Gdansk, Poland [http://www.autoblog.com/2006/09/20/pole-position-yet-another-new-f1-track/]
** flagicon|Portugal Portimao, Portugal [http://www.motorauthority.com/news/motorsport/india-and-portugal-in-latest-f1-buzz/]
** flagicon|Romania Bucharest, Romania [http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/26082006/8/photo/traian-basescu-romanian-president.html]
** flagicon|Russia Moscow, Russia [http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=32153]
** flagicon|San Marino Imola, San Marino

In order to make room for such new races, either the number of races needs to be increased or existing races in Europe need to be removed. In the 2008 regulations the maximum number of races per year has been lifted from 17 to 20. [http://formula-1.updatesport.com/news/article/1163844589/formula_one/F1headlines/F1-ready-for-20-race-calendar/view.html] The future for many traditional grands prix is still on the line, however. The first victim of this expansion of the calendar was the Austrian Grand Prix, last held in 2003. From 2007, the German is being held at alternating venues and the San Marino race has been lost. The threat remains with several teams having expressed their preference for a shorter calendar [http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=31568] . In the recent past, the British, San Marino, French, Canadian, Hungarian and Belgian Grands Prix have been placed under threat as attractive circuits in lucrative markets vie for a place in the Formula One calendar. This problem is accentuated by the fact that constructors need to be compensated to race in more than seventeen grands prix in one season. On February 3, 2007, Bernie Ecclestone announced a race in Abu Dhabi from 2009 [http://www.formula1.com/news/5604.html] . Although Indianapolis is listed above, it is a returning event but the circuit map had partially changed. Reportedly, the speedway is likely to return. [http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/080329153006.shtml]

Contracted Races

The following Grands Prix have been confirmed for the following dates.

ee also

* List of Formula One Grands Prix for complete Formula One results and season reviews
* 2008 Formula One season
* 2009 Formula One season

References