Checkpoint 10

No president is good for Formula 1

2009-07-12T18:31:00.000-07:00

Lately, there's been some buzz regarding the candidacy of Ari Vatanen for the position of FIA President. Apparently, the former rally champion has the support of the American automobile club, as well as at least one Formula 1 team principal. Surely, with Max Mosley being such a repugnant leader, anyone else would be an improvement, right?

No. Instead of fussing about who should replace Mosley, Formula 1 should work towards rejecting the FIA's authority and move to a system of self-governance. The only thing the FIA might be good for is to provide a safety crew at the races, but even CART has proven that you can organize a perfectly functional crew without outside aid. The problem with the FIA is that it can use safety or the environment or whatever cause suits them to push through unreasonable rule changes that may or may not have anything to do with advancing the cause. The ultra-expensive and irrelevant KERS system is a great example of a failure to address both the cost and the environmental issue. This would not happen if FOTA governed themselves; only the most cynical would argue that people cannot be trusted to govern themselves, and such arguments are often used to rationalize tyranny (and are disseminated by tyrants themselves).

As imperfect as democracies sometimes are, democracies are not subject to the whim, values and self-interest of a dictator. CART experienced many changes of presidents during its history, so it cannot be considered to have a "strong" leader. But maybe that was a good thing; until 1995, its policies made it one of the premier open-wheel series in the world. There was seldom any unsavory politics coming from the team owners (aside from the occasional xenophobic rulings that discouraged European car makers from competing). Sure, I am too young to remember this firsthand, but all the literature I have obtained from that era suggests a series that was comfortable with its leadership, and got on with the racing. Perhaps the only problem with CART's lack of a strong leader was its ineffectiveness in dealing with a rogue circuit owner. But I will always maintain that the end of CART had more to do with their conversion into a spec series than anything political.

FOTA should sever its ties with the FIA and the commercial rights holder, and become a self-sufficient entity. It's not enough just to oust Max Mosley and Bernie Ecclestone. FOTA has enough experience to start being their own boss, and it's time to stop being pushed around.

A lap at Nürburgring

2009-07-11T11:37:00.000-07:00

To many enthusiasts, Nürburgring means the classic circuit that includes the 14 mile-long Nordschleife, often hailed as the greatest circuit ever built. Unfortunately, on today's Formula 1 schedule, the Nürburgring is a boring, technical circuit with little charm or character, seemingly designed with a ruler and compass. It requires frequent braking, as most of the corners are taken in second or third gear. The driving experience here is as bad as Tilke circuits such as Bahrain. I managed a 1:34.110 before giving up.

Turn 1 is the Castrol-S, a corner that used to resemble the first turn at Barcelona before it was inexplicably mutilated into a slow hairpin and parking lot-style complex by none other than Hermann Tilke. The rest of the circuit is only slightly better. There is a forgettable series of corners leading to the Dunlop Curve, which looks like a spoon as you approach it, but is actually so tight that it feels more like a hairpin. Coming out of there, you reach the only interesting set of corners on the track, a fast left and right taken flat out. Then, it's two more boring 90-degree corners before you go up the hill. Cruelly, your reward at the top of the hill is an absurdly tight chicane. Then, it's another tight right-hander before coming back onto the pit straight.

A lap at Toronto

2009-07-10T21:18:00.001-07:00

The Toronto street circuit and I go way back to 1995. At the time, I was playing the PC game IndyCar Racing, which had Toronto as one of the default circuits. Since then, I've driven it on IndyCar Racing II and CART Precision Racing.

Currently, there are no original Toronto mods available for rFactor, so I used Strava's conversion from IndyCar Racing II. Ran about ten laps using my St. Petersburg setup and did a 1:00.386, which I guess isn't too far off the pace.

The first race at Toronto was held in 1986. Just a few years later, Joe Saward (in The World Atlas of Motor Racing) wrote glowingly of the circuit:

The CART men had grown used to visiting temporary street circuits at the time but few had impressed the drivers, who complained of driving through concrete tunnels created by the huge blocks positioned around the tracks. Toronto was different. There were no bumps and, unusually for a street track, it was fast, the 11-turn course being lapped at an average speed of around 100 mph. It was immediately well received by the top Indy runners, who ranked Toronto alongside Long Beach as one of the best street races on the North American calendar.

Remarkably, the circuit hasn't changed much since 1986 (the start-finish complex has been tightened in recent years). It still features a long back straightaway, site of a fatal accident in 1996, and a fast "arc" around the back of the circuit. However, I think the course has become too short for today's race cars, and perhaps it would be more interesting to race on longer circuits with more elevation changes and bumps.

Deal with CVC? Bleh.

2009-07-09T20:55:00.000-07:00

The latest story in this very confusing Formula One drama is that FOTA is coming close to a new Concorde Agreement with CVC Capital Partners, owner of the Formula One Group. While the teams are likely trying to negotiate a much larger share of the profits, they really should try to distance themselves from a document that has been shrouded in mystery since the 1980s, especially if they want to inspire a new era of transparency and accountability.

I still think the best idea would be for FOTA to become a completely independent entity, unencumbered by dealings with the commercial rights holders and the FIA. FOTA should reinstate their plans for a breakaway series and follow through.

Formula 1 and Hitler in the elevator

2009-07-08T22:48:00.000-07:00

At my workplace, the elevators have a little television screen that usually shows the weather, news headlines and fun facts. Today, as I was going up to the cafeteria in a crowded elevator, I looked up and saw the headline: "Ecclestone apologizes for Hitler remarks." This was followed by a few sentences about the scandal and, for the people who aren't familiar with the sport, a helpful description of Mr. Ecclestone as the "Formula 1 boss." A good handful of my co-workers now associate Hitler with Formula 1.

This moment has made me feel embarrassed to be a Formula 1 fan. It is a good thing nobody at work knows that I'm a fan, and these days I'm not inclined to tell anybody. Why is Formula 1 all screwed up?

A lap at Watkins Glen

2009-07-03T14:01:00.001-07:00

If I had to name just one thing that the IndyCar series has gotten right, it would be that they race at the legendary Watkins Glen circuit. In fact, they race on the same full-length "Grand Prix" layout previously used for the United States Grand Prix during the 1970s. I think Watkins Glen is easily the best driving circuit on the IndyCar schedule for some decades, even compared with the golden age of IndyCar during the 1990s and measured against the likes of Laguna Seca and Road America. It's fun, it's fast, and it's exciting. Here's my lap of Watkins Glen, completed in 1:27.517 (faster than the lap record of 1:29.192 set by Helio Castroneves in 2007).

Watkins Glen is relentless succession of very quick corners, reminiscent of Brands Hatch in England or Mosport Park in Canada. The corners look sharp on paper, but they are banked, making them much faster than you'd expect. At Turn 1, downshift a couple gears and follow the concrete patch to the exit of the corner. Now, you set up for the Esses, which is best described as the American response to Eau Rouge. It's a flat-out, uphill climb to the back straightaway. Now, there is a chicane at the end of this straightaway, but it's not like one of those European chicanes where you have to brake hard and break up your rhythm. For this one, called Bus Stop, you barely slow down, using as much of the curbs as possible to minimize turning, and then get back on the gas as soon as you can see the exit.

Right away, you dive into the Inner Loop, a fast banked turn that goes into the Grand Prix extension, also known as the Boot. Turns 8 and 9 both give generous banking. Turn 10 is a slow, blind corner that leads back onto the main circuit. Turn 11 can be taken nearly-flat (although I slowed down a bit too much in the video) and Turn 12 is another exercise in maintaining stability through the banked concrete patch. The car should probably be set up with an emphasis on maximum speed and stability upon exiting the fast corners.

Oh, by the way, FOTA should race here, too.

A lap at Richmond

2009-06-28T08:57:00.000-07:00

At 0.75 miles, Richmond International Raceway is the smallest circuit in the IndyCar series. It is also one of the more difficult ovals from a car set-up perspective. After a hundred laps of testing, I still could not get my car set up properly, and recorded a lap of 18.270 seconds, or 147.783 mph. No matter what I did to it, the car seemed to want to understeer in Turn 1, oversteer in Turn 2, and understeer badly into Turn 3. If IndyCar wants to keep playing in front of a NASCAR audience, I'd say this race is probably worth keeping---seems like more of a challenge than circuits like Iowa.

FOTA negotiates victory for Bernie and Max

2009-06-24T07:27:00.000-07:00

Deals like this make me lose faith in humanity. It is a victory for tyranny and greed. A defeat for courage, progress and democracy.

I believe people were paralyzed into inaction due to their fears of a CART-IRL death spiral, which I have repeatedly argued would not have been the case. Sadly, my opinion has only so much reach compared to fearmongers like Joe Saward who kept arguing that a split would "destroy" F1 up to the very end. Saward is an intelligent man who has earned his living covering the sport since the 1980s. Perhaps that is why he feels rather attached to the current state of things.

I am much younger and do not have any special affection for Ferrari and Monaco. I just want to see the fastest, most innovative cars on the best circuits, and I believe both of these have been denied from me since I started watching in 1998. I am unconvinced that people from my generation are seriously interested in Formula 1 the way that the older people are. The way things are going, I predict that within twenty years of lack of changes, Formula 1 will find itself catering primarily to a viewership of pensioners who only cling to "the good old days," having failed to keep the young people excited about the sport. And that's how it will end, not with a bang but a whimper.

I don't know why people think there is anything worth preserving in Formula 1. It's gone on for fifty years. It's proved its point, served its purpose. The cars have essentially not changed for the last fifteen years. Why not pack it up and start a new series? Why not make it exciting again? I watched the race at Silverstone over the weekend and I was thoroughly bored. It didn't seem like a race----it seemed like a game, played the same way over and over.

Formula 1 logo. Formation lap. A bunch of identical cars with identical engines, chassis and tires on the grid. Lights go on and off. Somebody loses a wing near the back. Speculation about who's on how many stops. They stop. They stop again. They are forced to change to another tire compound. Somebody wins. Podium ceremony, flags raised, national anthems played, trophies handed out in the same order as ever, champagne spraying, press conference.

Why do I even bother anymore? It's the same freaking race, every race, every season. But they can't mix it up, because the races are centrally governed and the procedures are hard-coded into the FIA regulations. I am not afraid to tell you on this blog that I don't actually watch all of the races because they happen at 4:30am for me. And if I (a relatively knowledgeable fan who blogs) am not watching it, what hope is there that Formula 1 will entice the general public to watch, when there's so much other stuff to do in the world?

A renewal of the Concorde Agreement is a renewal of "more of the same." It's a renewal of the fact that people like me will find it harder and harder to get up in the morning to watch Formula 1. And Max Mosley will stay in power indefinitely and Bernie Ecclestone will continue to steal money from the teams and promoters.

At least my blog will stay in business, as I will continue to have many things to complain about.

Update: Max Mosley has announced that he will finally retire in October. But I'll believe it when I see it. There remains the possibility that he might be replaced with a worse dictator. And there is nothing in the agreement about the removal of Bernie Ecclestone or fairer distribution of wealth. All the press is saying this is a win for the sport, but I am still skeptical.

FOTA Should Race Here, Vol. 3: Zandvoort

2009-06-22T21:29:00.000-07:00

Designed by John "the anti-Tilke" Hugenholtz, Zandvoort is one of the few circuits that has retained much of its original design even after decades of racing. Although it underwent a significant reprofiling in the 1990s, the best parts of the circuit have remained unaltered, and the new parts have actually stayed in character with the original circuit. Zandvoort is still about big, fast turns, elevation changes, and banked corners.

I took my McLaren out for a drive and clocked a 1:17.588, which beats Luca Badoer's lap record of 1:19.880 set in a Ferrari F1 car in 2001. Not the cleanest lap, though. I'm sure you can do better.

First turn is the Tarzan corner, a banked hairpin quite unlike anything else on the Formula 1 calendar. You can brake very deep into it and still get around with no problem. Then, you guide your car over the hill (Gerlach corner) before braking for Hugenholtz corner. From here, it's a wild, flat out ride through the dunes, and you won't be doing much braking until at least four sweeping turns later, when you finally arrive at the Renault corner, which requires a slight tap on the brakes and a downshift or two. However, the circuit becomes very wide, so you have more space on the exit than you think. This is also the "new" part of the circuit, but it still feels old-school. After the anachronistically-named Vodafone corner, you'll come to a fairly long straight, before having to negotiate the obligatory chicane. Having cleared that, you'll be heading back to the "old" circuit, completing the lap with two very fast right-handers, similar to the way the Barcelona circuit used to end.

I like this circuit because it challenges you and your car, and yet it doesn't bore you the way that Hermann Tilke's circuits do. Zandvoort is actually fun to drive on. You look forward to the sweeping corners lap after lap. It doesn't feel like a chore. FOTA should race here.

I leave you with a video of Alain Prost at the old Zandvoort layout.

Past editions of FOTA Should Race Here:
Vol. 2: Brands Hatch
Vol. 1: Laguna Seca

FOTA-FIA is more like CART-USAC than CART-IRL

2009-06-19T22:33:00.000-07:00

Qwerty over at Motor Racing Journal has written a great post on why we should not assume that the Formula 1 split will end up like the open-wheel split in America.

[T]he biggest mistake of all was then that both series went spec. A single specification series absolutely killed it for me. It was absolute nonsense. To me, any attempt by Formula 1 to head down the spec route would be the thing that kills it.

This analysis is spot-on. It wasn't the split that killed open-wheel racing in America, it was the decision by one series to institute a "chassis-freeze" and the other series to hand-pick the chassis constructors. These policies turned both of the series into spec formula racing instead of playgrounds for innovation.

Don't forget there was an open-wheel "split" in 1979 that was highly successful and began under circumstances very similar to the FOTA-FIA war. Let me just quote from the Wikipedia article:

The split from USAC in 1978 (first race in 1979) was spurred by a group of activist car owners who had grown disenchanted with what they saw as an inept sanctioning body. Complaining of poor promotion and small purses, this group coalesced around Dan Gurney who, in early 1978, wrote what came to be known as the "Gurney White Paper," the blueprint for an organization called Championship Auto Racing Teams. Gurney took his inspiration from the improvements Bernie Ecclestone had forced on Formula One with his creation of the Formula One Constructors Association. The White Paper called for the owners to form CART as an advocacy group to promote USAC's national championship, doing the job where the sanctioning body would not. The group would also work to negotiate television rights and race purses, and ideally hold seats on USAC's governing body.

This particular "split" turned into a series that, within 15 years, had several ex-World Champions, multiple chassis, engine and tire constructors, had an excellent safety record, and was considered a serious threat to Formula 1.

In the meantime, the original series (USAC IndyCar) continued for only one more full season before losing out to CART. Just like the FIA's Formula 1 series, the USAC IndyCar series boasted only one legitimate contender after the split (A.J. Foyt).

If the Formula 1 split continues, I believe it is more likely that we will see the death of the FIA Formula 1 World Championship within a season or two, and that the FOTA World Championship (whatever it is called) will usher in a golden age for Formula 1-style racing, as CART did for Indy cars for over 15 years.

Fear not the breakaway series!

2009-06-18T16:37:00.000-07:00

I congratulate FOTA on their announcement of a breakaway series.

The announcement should not be seen as a move to damage Formula 1. This is, instead, a long-overdue rejection of the authoritarian leadership of Max Mosley and the greed of Bernie Ecclestone. Any other solution involving "compromise" with these individuals would have amounted to a continuation of a grossly unjust institution that has been responsible for so many of the scandals and "dumbing-down" of the sport in recent years, not to mention the outsourcing of the races to exotic locations with no motor sport history and the arbitrary cancellation of the more classic races.

To correct many years of injustice is never easy. We cannot fear the pain of having two series in 2010, if it means that we will ultimately have a series that is properly governed and will be economically fair to all competitors involved. It is easy to say that we should give up and fight another day. But as I have said many times over, there is nothing left to lose, nothing worth preserving, in the current Formula 1. It is time to start over.

Had a compromise been made between FOTA and Max Mosley, I would have lost faith in the sport. Instead, I am now excited about the prospect of a series in which the competitors can govern themselves, and perhaps more importantly, benefit financially in a fair manner. I am excited to see that people can stand up to tyranny. This is, without a doubt, the best news I have heard coming out of Formula 1 since I started watching in 1998.

For more on my position on the FOTA-FIA war, please refer to my earlier posts, "FOTA should "split" from the sinking ship!" and "FOTA can create a new golden age for motorsport."

A lap at Iowa Speedway

2009-06-17T21:52:00.000-07:00

All too easy. This is a video of me within ten minutes of driving on Iowa for the first time, using my trusty Milwaukee setup. Lap speed: 184.859 mph (easily beating the actual lap record of 178.490 mph). Didn't have to brake, didn't have to lift. All I needed to do was to turn left and make a slight correction in Turn 4 for oversteer. IndyCar needs to get rid of these ovals which pose no driving challenge.

A lap at Silverstone

2009-06-17T20:46:00.000-07:00

This year's British Grand Prix might be the last one to take place at Silverstone, site of the first Formula 1 race back in 1950. It's a shame, because Silverstone is one of the last circuits to feature some really awe-inspiring corners, despite being progressively mutilated with chicanes and slow corners since the late 1970s. Nonetheless, Silverstone is one of the few circuits that can legitimately claim to link modern Formula 1 with its colorful past.

Let's have a tour of the circuit. Here's another last-row effort from me: a 1:22.663 in a car that should be about 3 seconds faster.

Earlier, I was raving to you about how fast Brands Hatch is, and similarly I shall rave about the sensation of speed you can get from Silverstone, particularly its first few corners. Copse is an incredible, flat out, 6th gear corner which lines you up for Maggotts, a flat-out slight left and right (like some kind of super fast chicane), and Becketts, only a slightly slower left-right complex. Whew! The circuit rewards you for your hard work by giving you a break all the way down Hangar Straight, but then it's another very fast, slightly-banked corner called Stowe. I don't get this one right in the video, so expect to go significantly quicker with practice.

Then, here comes the part of the circuit I don't understand. Suddenly, you are forced to drive through some slow corners (The Vale, Club, Abbey) even though you can use the curbs without much consequence. Bridge (a fast right) is a nice reprise of the earlier corners, but it dumps you into some agonizingly slow corners (Priory, Brooklands, and Luffield). Ironic that one of the slowest corners on the circuit (Brooklands) should be named after the world's first high-speed oval. And Luffield just takes forever to get around, but at least you come out of it looking forward to the start/finish straight and the breathtaking Copse corner.

The fictional F1 media? (Part 3)

2009-06-16T18:13:00.000-07:00

(Link to Part 1 and Part 2 of this story)

I was playing on rFactor when the Mole rushed into the basement and shouted: "Look what the FIA has released!" I abandoned my virtual McLaren at the side of the road and followed the mysterious journalist into the news room. Sitting on the table were five pages of classic Max Mosley prose, bitterly denouncing the efforts of FOTA while defending his own authority.

"Whatever, man," I said. "This is bullshit." I confess I was more interested in filming my joyride around Silverstone than to dignify Mad Max's rant with a close reading.

"Actually, I think you might be interested," said the Mole, waving the faxed pages in the air. I quickly grabbed the pages from him, before they stunk up the air any further.

I was shocked by what I read. It turned out that the press release was actually derived from an exclusive interview I had with Max Mosley while I was vacationing in Paris over the weekend. I had gained access to Mosley's chambers while disguised as Ali G. Well, I'm going to do what every self-respecting journalist should do, and reveal what really happened that prompted Mosley to say such ludicrous things:

CP10: I'm here with none other than Max Mosley, the President of the FIA, who's here to talk about the dispute between FOTA and the FIA over the future of Formula 1. Thanks for being here, Mr. Mosley.

MM: I hope what we need now is simplicity, clarity and above all certainty.

CP10: Yes, yes. I hope so, too. Would you care to explain your position on this matter?

MM: What is this dispute really all about? Is it about an attempt by some teams to take over the commercial rights to Formula One? Or to take the regulatory function away from the FIA? Or even just a clash of personalities?

CP10: Are you asking me? I would say, yes. The teams are indeed trying to take over the commercial rights, which they justly deserve, and to be able to govern themselves, like any modern democracy. As for the clash of personalities, I would say that is a no-brainer, since you are a certified bastard. But what do you think, you senile ass?

MM: The real issue is philosophical; it goes to the fundamentals of Formula One. It is about technical freedom. It is recognition by the FIA and several teams that you can have technical freedom - the freedom to innovate - or you can have freedom to spend without limit. But you cannot sustain both.

CP10: Whoa, let's back up here. I smell an either-or fallacy here. Can you please explain why we can't have both?

MM: The lesson which emerged from five years of attempts to contain engine costs was that real savings could only be achieved by the removal of technical freedom: the engine freeze.

CP10: Which is one of the most tragic developments in Formula 1, which occurred under your watch. But, sorry I interrupted you, nitwit. Please go on.

MM: The consensus is that the replacement [to a frozen engine] will have to have a budget - a limit on what can be spent on development and a limit on unit cost, just like the engines being developed for road cars.

CP10: Whose consensus are we talking about? Do you mean your own unilateral consensus?

MM: The alternative would be to go back to unlimited expenditure on racing engines by the major car companies. This was never a rational approach, but would be insane in the current climate.

CP10: Well, if the manufacturers want to spend that much, what's wrong with that? Isn't Formula 1 supposed to be the pinnacle of racing technology, regardless of how much is being spent? If it means, in this economy, that all competitors must buy a McLaren or Ferrari to win, wouldn't that still guarantee that we are seeing the best of the best cars in the world? Besides, I think we all know who's the "insane" one in this ordeal.

MM: We can see that attempts to rein in expenditure with detailed rules will not work. They did not work on the engine and they will not work on the chassis. Detailed rules stifle inventiveness and innovation.

CP10: I'm not disputing that here. However, I just want to ask, who's responsible for all those detailed rules? Wasn't it the FIA? Wasn't it Max Mosley who turned Formula 1 into a spec series? Didn't you stifle inventiveness and innovation? That seems to me the result of a serious mismanagement of the sport from the top. That's why you have no credibility. What crazy solution do you propose, you blockhead?

MM: If we wish to see innovative technology in Formula One, the only way is to limit expenditure and allow the engineers freedom to do their best within a fixed budget. This is exactly what happens in the real world and it is the only way forward for Formula One.

CP10: Excuse me, but I can name some other ways forward for Formula One. Again, I think you are presenting a case of false dilemma.

MM: Without technical innovation, Formula One will wither and die.

CP10: I agree, so let's allow the teams to do what they will, and lay your hands off their finances.

MM: Without real cost constraints, Formula One will lose its teams. This is why the FIA is insisting on cost restraint as part of the Formula One regulations.

CP10: Okay, but you and I know that is an exaggeration. Sure, there will be some teams who won't make it, but that's always been the story of the sport. But Ferrari and McLaren won't have any problems staying on the grid, and they can sell their cars to other teams to make up the numbers----oh, I forgot you believe that everyone should build their own cars. Anyway, there are always teams who would love to participate in Formula 1, even if they don't have the budget to win. Look at all the teams from the early 1990s who filled up the grid. But once in a while, you get a team like Jordan who proves that they can beat teams with a fraction of the budget. And if I recall, it's the FIA that imposed a 107% qualifying rule and $40M entry fee to reduce the grid sizes. In any case, why is it that the FIA has jurisdiction over the teams' finances? Isn't the FIA's responsibility primarily to provide for safety at the races? Why does the FIA care who shows up to the races?

MM: With a limit on expenditure, the cleverest and most innovative engineering team will win. It will no longer be possible to substitute a massive budget for intellectual ability. In a technological sporting contest this must surely be the right way.

CP10: I beg to differ. Formula One is not just a competition between intellectual abilities. If I wanted to see that, I would watch the International Mathematical Olympiad. Old man, have you forgotten that Formula One is a race? Between very fast cars? The fastest cars that could be made, by hook or by crook? Also, will you please address how you plan to enforce a budget cap?

MM: If there is no intention to cheat, regulation should not present a threat.

CP10: That is the same kind of reasoning one might hear from proponents of CCTV, wiretapping or warrantless searches. Speaking of authoritarianism, how do you respond to FOTA's desire for better governance, which basically means you need to step down and get the hell out of the sport?

MM: The FIA and Ferrari extended the 1998 Concorde Agreement back in 2005 and the FIA is prepared to do the same with all the teams that enter. Once that is in place the FIA and the teams can look at updating it to a 2009 version. But this is not the point. Formula One needs a strong and impartial regulator because of the nature of the sport, the high stakes and the competitors - people who want to win (literally) at any cost.

CP10: Actually, have you considered that perhaps your ridiculously constricting and arbitrary rules were the cause of many of the scandals in recent years? Maybe it was you who set up this toxic environment in which many of the designers have to push the envelope in order to win? And, of course, we know that the Concorde Agreement is horribly unjust in its revenue sharing scheme, thus making it even more vital for teams to gain that extra edge to score points. How do you sleep at night, you destroyer of sport? You waster of my time! You conspirator with the great thief Bernie Ecclestone! I think it's time to bring this interview to an end, you pompous idiot.

MM: Formula One will have a full grid in 2010 with a single set of regulations.

CP10: Yeah. Good luck with that.

FOTA Should Race Here, Vol. 2: Brands Hatch

2009-06-13T14:21:00.001-07:00

Brands Hatch was the site of the British Grand Prix alternate years from 1964 to 1986, until the race moved full-time to Silverstone. Gerhard Berger once said, "For me, the best circuit in the world is Brands Hatch. But it's a bit dangerous now for Formula 1" (quoted in The World Atlas of Motor Racing by Joe Saward).

There have been some renovations since, but all the classic corners have remained intact. In fact, the chicane at Dingle Dell has actually been removed, making it every bit as treacherous as it has ever been. Should FOTA make a return to this classic circuit? I took my McLaren Formula 1 car onto the circuit to find out.

At the end of the start/finish Brabham Straight, you brake slightly and downshift for the Paddock Hill Bend, which drops you downhill towards Druids, the slowest corner on the circuit. Then, you'll head back towards the paddock area before throwing your car over the slowish Graham Hill Bend onto the Cooper Straight. Then it's a bit of a straightaway before you reach Surtees, which is a large radius corner that takes a while to complete. You'll want to get back on the gas as soon as possible, in order to get maximum speed down the next straightaway. There's a dramatic dip, and then a rise (kind of like Eau Rouge) before you lift for the Hawthorn Bend. That's right, you'll try to keep the braking to a minimum through this forest section. Westfield Bend is even faster, but has lower grip. Again, the track dips and rises, like a roller coaster, right before you enter the Dingle Dell corner, a fast right. Then, it's a very fast left turn around Stirlings Bend (with a little help from a slight banking). And then, it's yet another fast right through the Clark Curve before you see the start/finish line.

The sensation of speed at Brands Hatch is incredible, even though you'll rarely exceed 180 mph. With all the elevation and camber changes, the corners are just thrilling to drive through. That's what's missing from today's circuits: Sepang and Shanghai might be "challenging," but they feel less like a thrill and more like a chore. Okay, I can see why people say Brands Hatch might be a little dangerous, but with a little upgrade to the runoff areas and crash barriers, I think they can make it work for the new generation of Formula 1 cars.

Here's how it's done by a pro:

FOTA Should Race Here, Vol. 1: Laguna Seca

2009-06-12T23:17:00.000-07:00

Today's release of the 2010 Formula 1 entry list has done little to stop the discussions about a possible breakaway series. In this new feature, I shall add some vivid illustrations of what a post-FIA Formula 1 series could look like. What if FOTA decides to hold a race at the Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca, here in sunny California?

Laguna Seca is one of the most recognizable road circuits in the United States, mainly because of the awesome corkscrew, but also because of its scenic environment. Some people say that Laguna Seca is too narrow, too small for the fastest open-wheel race cars in the world. But, after driving around the circuit in my McLaren Formula 1 car, I have to say that it feels like just the right size for Formula 1, comparable to a circuit like Barcelona.

Sure, the runoff areas might not be as big as the ones designed by Hermann Tilke, but you don't need that much runoff at Laguna Seca. It's not that fast----maximum speed is perhaps 180 mph at the Andretti hairpin. After running for about twenty minutes, I reached a lap time of 1:05.262, which beats the unofficial lap record set by Sebastian Bourdais in a Champ Car and is faster than Ricardo Zonta's lap in a Toyota F1 car in 2006.

As I mentioned, you reach maximum speed towards the Andretti hairpin, and then it's heavy braking into the hairpin. Get back on the gas as quickly as you can, and downshift for the right-hander Turn 3. Then, you accelerate towards Turn 4, which can be taken with only a slight lift. Turn 5 is relatively sharp, and takes you up the hill towards Turn 6, which is very fast and is ideally taken flat out. If Turn 6 ever gets onto a Formula 1 calendar, it would be one of the very best corners in Formula 1, easily more exciting than that 4-apex thing at Istanbul. Anyway, you keep going uphill towards the infamous Corkscrew. You won't see it coming, so just brake as late you dare over the bumps, and dive. There is no corner in the world like the Corkscrew. The rest of the lap is pretty much downhill, literally and figuratively. Turn 9 is pretty much flat out, but you're not going that fast into it, anyway. Turns 10 and 11 aren't really anything to write home about, and could possibly be changed without ruining the spirit of the track.

I leave you with an actual demonstration of a Formula 1 car at Laguna Seca.

FOTA should "split" from the sinking ship!

2009-06-10T19:39:00.000-07:00

1996 Formula 1 World Champion Damon Hill is the latest commentator to warn that a Formula 1 split would be damaging to the sport:

You only have to look over the pond to see what happens when you split a championship . . . It's difficult enough to draw people into one particular sport, so what will they make of two separate championships? It would just dilute it.

Hill is one of my favorite drivers, but I must disagree with him on this point. I believe Formula 1 is damaged beyond repair, thanks to the greedy and tyrannical regime of Bernie and Max. There is nothing worth saving. A split would actually provide the manufacturers with an opportunity to create a new series with fair governance and profit sharing, and possibly more interesting cars than the current fleet of build-to-spec racers. These days, when people throw around the word "split," they think of chopping something in half, or what amoeba do. No, no, that's the wrong way to think about it. I believe a manufacturers' F1 series would more analogous to a split that a lifeboat should make from a sinking ship.

We shouldn't forget that CART in 1994 was one of the strongest series in the world: it had multiple chassis and engine manufacturers, it featured several past and future F1 world champions, and it had grid sizes in excess of 30 cars. The future was bright. There was no reason for the formation of the Indy Racing League in 1994. That's why the split was problematic from the start----Tony George tried to fix something that wasn't broken.

But Formula 1 in 2009 is different. It is on a slippery slope to Hell. The governance is a nightmare. The sport is dragged into courtrooms all too often. There is virtually no room for creative design and innovative ideas. The races are going to uninspired circuits in countries that don't give a damn. If Formula 1 dies, I can't say I would really miss it. I wouldn't have to get up early in the morning for the boring parade of cars that stopped developing meaningfully fifteen years ago. I wouldn't have to spend my spare time blogging about why I am so frustrated that I grew up with motor sport for this?

The manufacturers cannot afford to sign up for another punishing season of Formula 1. Please put us out of our misery by forming a new and better series!

An optimistic look into the crystal ball

2009-06-09T18:36:00.000-07:00

Here's what I'm hoping will happen to Formula 1:

June 2009
FOTA joins the FIA Formula 1 season unconditionally, as requested by Max Mosley.

Mosley adds all ten of the current Formula 1 teams to the entry list, and grants entry to three more. Those three will be USGP, Prodrive and Lola.

Summer 2009
A Concorde Agreement is not signed, leaving the teams with no little or no legal obligations to Bernie Ecclestone. The failure to sign a new agreement is due to the teams' demands for over 80% of the Formula 1 revenue.

FOTA attempts to negotiate with Max Mosley. Mosley is unwilling to submit to any of their demands. These negotiations fail. The cost capping, KERS, etc. stay in the regulations.

Autumn 2009
FOTA publicly calls for a change in governance in the FIA, as well as a more equitable revenue distribution plan. There are threats to boycott the Australian Grand Prix. Max Mosley reminds the teams that there will be severe penalties if they boycott.

December 2009
FOTA agrees not to boycott the Australian Grand Prix. But secretly, FOTA organizes a new series, the opening race of which will be run simultaneously with the Australian Grand Prix. The FOTA series is developed to use modified 2008-spec chassis with significantly uptuned engines. These cars are prepared at minimal expense to the teams. In the meantime, teams put together their 2010 cars for the FIA series.

February 2010
FOTA makes a groundbreaking announcement about the formation of a new series, the Super A Championship. There are protests from Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley about this news. Ecclestone threatens to withhold payments to the teams if this happens. Mosley reminds the teams that he reserves the right to punish the teams for bringing the sport into disrepute.

The FOTA teams begin testing their Super A cars. There are daily headlines in racing publications about the breaking of unofficial lap records.

March 2010
The FOTA teams send their 2010 Formula 1 cars to the Australian Grand Prix, with only a minimal crew for each car. On the eve of the Grand Prix, FOTA teams nominate the likes of Pedro de la Rosa, Marc Gene and Christian Klein to be the race drivers.

Meanwhile, the highly developed Super A cars and stars such as Fernando Alonso, Felipe Massa and Lewis Hamilton show up to Silverstone, complete with most of the team members. There is a thrilling battle for pole position between Ferrari and McLaren. More European journalists show up to the Silverstone race than the Australian GP, due to cheaper travel costs and the sensational aspect of the race.

On Sunday, about fifteen minutes into the Australian GP broadcast, television viewers become bored as the Williams cars pull away from their challengers. Teams like Ferrari and McLaren are nowhere in sight, as they are cruising behind Lola and USGP. Viewers change the channel just in time for the start of the Super A championship, with all of its famous teams and drivers. FOTA puts on a spectacular race in the rain, with a record crowd witnessing an epic battle between Ferrari, McLaren and Renault.

The international press focuses on the "split" and mentions how the Formula 1 race appeared to a second-rate category with drivers you've never heard of.

April 2010
Bernie Ecclestone is outraged and tries to sue the FOTA teams for competing in another series. However, the lack of a Concorde Agreement makes this difficult, plus the fact that FOTA is competing in Formula 1, as well.

Max Mosley charges the teams with bringing the sport into disrepute. The FOTA teams maintain that they are still competing in Formula 1 and are in full compliance of the rules, including the cost cap. Mosley drags this business all the way to the EU courts, with little success.

Meanwhile, FOTA signs lucrative deals directly with broadcasters and race organizers all over Europe and the Americas. The revenue is used to pay for any legal costs fighting Bernie and Max, as well to the poorer teams who choose to race in Super A.

Summer 2010
Ratings go down for the Formula 1 events, while advertising revenue increases for Super A, as sponsors prefer to be seen with brands like Mercedes-Benz and Ferrari than Lola and Prodrive. In a desperate attempt to raise money, Bernie Ecclestone signs up new races in ever more exotic parts of the world. FOTA, on the other hand, races at such circuits as Zandvoort, Road Atlanta and the new Portrero de los Funes circuit in Argentina. Since Super A is not Formula 1, it does not need to race at circuits that require Formula 1-level certification. Faced with the choice, the racing media regularly attends the Super A races instead of Formula 1.

Autumn 2010
There is an embarrassingly low crowd turnout at the Formula 1 season closer as Williams have already won the championship a long time ago. FOTA teams do not enter the 2011 Formula 1 season.

Faced with the prospect of a half-grid of mediocre entries and financial losses, the FIA Formula One World Championship shuts down. Super A becomes the de facto world championship for open-wheel cars.

A lap at Texas

2009-06-07T11:03:00.000-07:00

The Texas Motor Speedway is another easy oval. Nothing to say here except push the gas down for the entire lap. Yawn.

In more exciting news, I've been tinkering with the demo of Bob's Track Builder. I figure if I'm going to complain about the quality of racing circuits today, why not design them myself?

FOTA can create a new golden age for motorsport

2009-06-04T21:10:00.000-07:00

In this times, people are talking about why we shouldn't have another open-wheel split. I say we should, and in fact, I believe we must have a split if Formula One should have a chance to regain any of its glory so badly damaged by greed and thirst for power. But first, let me respond to the idea that a Formula One split would be damaging to the sport, by reflecting on what really made open-wheel racing fail in America. I will then explain why FOTA can succeed with their own series and how they can do so.

A huge reason why there was no winner in the CART vs. IRL battle is that both decided to become a spec series and provide the fans with the same basic product of artificially close racing. CART paved the way by calling for a chassis freeze earlier this decade, and the IRL followed by hand-picking three chassis suppliers, one of which turned out to be stillborn. CART adopted gimmicks such as the push-to-pass button and the mandatory tire compounds, signs of a desperate series looking to create artificial excitement for the casual viewer. The real fans, meanwhile, left the sport in droves, and those who stayed behind left volumes of bitter and disillusioned words on the Internet. Eventually, Indy cars no longer stood for innovation and authentic excitement and instead looked like a pathetic imitation of NASCAR chasing after casual fans who just want to see overtaking.

There are those who believe that a Formula One split will yield the same results described above. However, I would like to point out that the damage has already been done. Formula One today is a spec series, featuring cars that have virtually no room for any meaningful innovation, cars that must all ride on Bridgestone tires, cars that are controlled by the same electronics. Formula One has introduced gimmicks such as mandatory tire changes and push-to-pass buttons.

If the pinnacle of motorsport shall be great again, it must reinvent itself. And there is no better way to do it than to throw away the old and start afresh with a clean sheet of paper. Even if Max Mosley decides to continue his Formula One for club racers, and even if he manages to put it on all the televisions in the world and continue calling it the "World Championship," there is a simple way for FOTA to stand up against all this and win, at the same time restoring the glory of World Championship level racing.

FOTA can win by providing a substantially different product than the one provided by the FIA. They must create a series that will embrace speed, danger, and innovation. These are all things that the FIA Formula One does not and will not stand for.

Speed is a very basic concept that once communicated to the soul of every fan who loved the sport. The idea that the cars are not only the fastest in the world, but the fastest in the world of all time. The thrill that one feels when a lap record is broken, the excitement of breaking speed barriers, first 150 mph, then 200 mph, and so on---this is the excitement that has not been felt since perhaps the 1990s.

This excitement is heightened by the danger. Danger has kept the crowds up and the viewers glued to their televisions. To run a car at high speed through Monaco is different from doing the same thing at Bahrain. There is a reason why all racing movies, and even Star Wars, depicts racing as brutal and potentially fatal. There is a reason why Ayrton Senna and Gilles Villeneuve are idolized, because they gave off the impression that they were absolutely on the limit between life and death. Today, the drivers are no longer daring superheroes who achieve the impossible whenever they get into a car. Nowadays, you are given all the room for error in the world; the driving looks easy because the circuits are easy. One almost feels that it might not be such an extraordinary thing to drive a Formula One car, after all. The magic is lost.

On the engineering side, innovation is the spirit that has kept the sport relevant throughout the 20th century. It is the innovation that makes automobile racing different from all other sports. Whereas football and basketball are essentially variations on the same game, a thousand times over, auto racing gives you the hope that, during the next race, a truly remarkable machine would be rolled out of its garage, a machine that would define the next generation, that would start a new chapter in automotive design. Innovation also goes hand-in-hand with speed. Without the inventions of designers such as Colin Chapman and Jim Hall, the racing story would be very boring indeed. Sadly, innovation can hardly be used today to describe a series for which the most advanced car was built over fifteen years ago.

FOTA has the ability to bring back these three elements that once defined auto racing. First, they can bring back speed by building fast cars that make the FIA Formula One cars look embarrassingly slow. This can already be achieved at minimal expense, since the technology to do this has already been in existence, albeit arbitrarily banned from competition for years.

FOTA should race on circuits that can best demonstrate speed. Obviously, a head-to-head matchup at existing Formula One circuits would be useful. However, if they wish to introduce the element of danger, FOTA should be more creative. Their circuits should incorporate steep elevation changes, narrow sections, bankings, bumps and little run-off. Their circuits should cover multiple surfaces, even dirt. Note, I am not calling for more drivers to die or get seriously injured. I am calling for circuits that really push the limits of man and machinery. We should acknowledge that it's the drivers who decide whether they want to step into the cockpit or not, and there will always be a Senna who does, because he has decided that there is meaning in what he does, that cheating death can be inspiring to themselves and others. The circuits must stir the imaginations of race fans, particularly the children who should be shown that anything is possible. If any of this is shocking and unrealistic: well, racing at the Nordschleife must have once been considered shocking and unrealistic. (Now, even if FOTA wishes to go down a more conservative path, they should look at the highly promising new circuit called Potrero de los Funes, which will surely go down as a modern classic.)

FOTA should throw out the rulebook and replace it with something closer to a pamphlet. All kinds of machinery should now be possible, within reasonable limits for safety. There should be no rules regarding the sale of cars or components to customers. Anyone who shows up to a race and passes inspection, even with a car of the most dubious origins, shall be allowed to race.

Filling up the grid is no problem, even if the FIA Formula One seems to have the advantage now. The fact is, there are always plenty of people who want to be associated with the fastest cars in the world, whether or not they have a chance to win. That's why Formula One has never had difficulty attracting entrants, except when it has actively sought to shut them out, with 107% rules and $40 million entry fees and secret commercial agreements. Backmarkers have always been part of the racing story, and it must be remembered that every team and many great drivers started out with nothing more than a dream. But the FIA Formula One teams will never be great, because they will never have proven themselves against the best, and they will never have the chance to build the world's fastest cars.

FOTA's new series does not need to be run by a dictator. It needs to be run on strong, uncompromised principles to preserve the speed, danger and innovation. It needs to have leaders who are only there to ensure that the principles are carried out. FOTA should not try to micromanage each event; instead, they should come up with technical regulations which are then distributed to all interested race organizers, who can organize their events however they want, paying the competitors generous prizes but otherwise being allowed to keep the proceeds in order to develop a stronger, perhaps an even more challenging event. The World Championship should cover these strongest events in the world, ones that best demonstrate speed, danger and innovation. And when all this becomes a reality, the FIA Formula 1 series shall be seen as antiquated, irrelevant and insulting to the sport, and fade away under the shadow of a new golden age of motorsport.

A lap at Istanbul Park

2009-06-02T23:37:00.001-07:00

Don't let all the hype about Turn 8 fool you. Istanbul Park contains all the classic design trademarks of Hermann Tilke: a technical "test track"-type layout that attempts to cram in as many kinds of corners as possible, a wide racing surface with lots of extra space for errors, annoyingly blind corners, and finally, location within a country that otherwise has no notable motor racing scene.

And Turn 8 is not even as exciting as the media would have you believe. It is wide, with very generous room for error. There's not much elevation change, absolutely no banking, and the surface is relatively smooth. In other words, it's four typical left turns strung together. So, what's the big deal?

The big deal is that Hermann Tilke has managed to design a layout that avoids the generic formula that he used at Sepang, Bahrain and Shanghai. Instead, he has made something that feels like a bland mixture of Interlagos, Magny-Cours, and the new Nurburgring. Allow me to hop into a McLaren and show you around the circuit in 1:28.152, which would've gotten me to Q2 in 2007!

They call Turn 1 the "Turkish Corkscrew," but I think that's insulting the actual Corkscrew at Laguna Seca. Turn 1 is more like the "Turkish Senna S from Interlagos in a case of copyright infringement." I've never actually gotten through Turn 1 successfully; the entrance is blind, apex is hard to spot; it's almost designed to piss you off right off the bat.

So, now I'm in a bad mood, having likely understeered through Turn 1 and lost valuable seconds already. Then, I go through Turn 2, which is so gentle it's not worth speaking about, and arrive at the very fast Turn 3. Again, another blind corner that's pretty unclear from the cockpit perspective until you're well into the corner. Did I mention that you have to turn, brake and downshift at the same time? As if I didn't have enough to worry about in my life.

Turn 4 is an agonizingly slow hairpin, followed by the low-speed Turns 5 and 6 which could be taken as a combination. Accelerate uphill from Turn 6 to arrive at your first timed checkpoint. Usually, I get bad news crossing the line, and as I head towards Turn 7, I find myself thinking along the lines of, "How the heck am I off the pace by 0.3 seconds? Where did I screw up? Oh yeah, Turn 1. What a dumb track. Oops, I better brake for that right turn ahead."

Turn 7 is another awkward little turn that has no purpose except to line you up for that magical Turn 8. My amateurish advice with Turn 8 is that you can't lift and you have to commit yourself all the way through the corner. You can amuse yourself by seeing how many apexes you can hit during this lap. The second and third apexes are the closest together and they need to thought of as one turn. The fourth one, you have some time to aim for it.

Now the best part of the track is over, and it's all downhill from here, and I mean that in a figurative sense. Turns 9 and 10 is an annoying little complex you have to brake for, and it sends you on a boring journey uphill, kind of like that last part of the new Nurburgring. Two straightaways designed by a ruler, connected by a slight kink. The scenery is kind of nice here, but the mood will be spoiled by having to think about the maddenly slow Turns 12, 13 and 14 coming up. I don't even want to blog about those turns; they're so slow. I would like to ask Hermann Tilke: why? Why not just have a simple, quick turn to go back to the main straightaway? Why does it have to be so much work just to complete the lap? Have I not suffered enough, lap after lap?

A lap at the Milwaukee Mile

2009-05-30T20:11:00.000-07:00

The Milwaukee Mile, site of this weekend's A.J. Foyt 225, is also one of the oldest speedways in the world. It was known for its treacherous bumps and uneven surface until it was resurfaced into a slightly boring track for the 1996 season.

I had my first virtual laps around "the Mile" in the original Papyrus IndyCar Racing game back in the mid-1990s. Being an impatient child, I didn't know anything about car setup, so I would just go with maximum wing, low AI difficulty, and pretend to be good while lapping the field. I also remember trying to find the perfect Indy car by systematically testing all 30 possible combinations of chassis and engines on 2 to 3 lap runs here. (Today, this exercise could be accomplished in one run, since the only option is a Dallara-Honda.)

It was a pleasure to revisit the Mile on rFactor after years of not having a decent open-wheel racing game to play with. As usual, the first step was to create a stable race car out of my trusty 1994 Lola-Ford. I found that you'll need to set up for maximum straight-line speed (low rear wing), but add a lot of front wing to minimize the understeer you'll get from the low banked turns. You'll also want to make your car soft enough to handle some of the bumps in the turns. Finally, you should move the brake bias towards the rear to encourage oversteer in the turns.

My hot lap was 20.869 seconds. Based on the latest measurement of the track, that's 175.092 mph. Here on the Milwaukee Mile you actually have to drive the car: with shifting, braking and a little sliding action. I found that the more aggressive I was going into the turns, the faster I went. It's much easier to do that when you have confidence in your car.

Is Formula 2 slower than Formula 3? (updated)

2009-05-29T17:46:00.000-07:00

Robert Wickens set a pole position lap of 1:27.775 [.pdf] at the Circuit de Valencia for the first round of the FIA Formula Two Championship. While Formula 2's spin machine has proudly announced that "The whole field was evenly matched, with less than a second covering the top 15 drivers," we will do some additional work to discover just where Formula 2 sits on the ladder of racing series.

Wicken's lap compares to the 1:08.540 unofficial lap record set by Anthony Davidson while testing a Honda Formula 1 car in 2006. Therefore, the Formula 2 lap time is approximately 128% of Formula 1. And just in case you're wondering, the weather was clear and not raining during F2 qualifying.

GP2, on the other hand, typically runs within 115% of Formula 1. For example, Nelson Piquet's 1:17.886 GP2 pole lap from the 2006 round at Valencia is 114% off the F1 lap record. However, GP2 cars have gone even quicker: Bruno Senna's 1:26.912 lap from the 2008 GP2 round at Silverstone is only 109% of the 1:19.537 time set by Lewis Hamilton during Formula 1 qualifying that same weekend. No question that GP2 is faster than Formula 2.

What about Formula 3? My unofficial survey of lap times on shared circuits shows that Oliver Turvey (2:14.101) qualified his Dallara F3 car within 126% of Heikki Kovalainen's 1:46.037 at Spa-Francorchamps in 2008. And Nico Hulkenberg was slightly closer at Hockenheim in 2008, his lap of 1:33.218 was 125% of Lewis Hamilton's 1:14.603 lap.

Could it be that Formula 2 is actually slower than Formula 3? We won't know for sure until we have more data, but the 128% time from this weekend appears damningly slow for a series that is supposed to be one step below Formula 1.

Update 5/30: It has been brought to my attention that Nico Hulkenberg set an F3 lap of 1:28.405 at Valencia in 2008 (thanks Jon). This is about 0.6 seconds slower than the F2 pole time. However, since the F3 time was set during testing, we don't know how much quicker the F3 could have gone in full qualifying trim.

Also, I think it would be fair to point out that, during the most recent Formula 1 test at Valencia in 2008, Kimi Raikkonen set the fast lap at 1:11.189. This would make the F2 pole time about 123% of the F1 time. Still, that seems to be a long way from the 109%-114% times set by GP2.

Update #2: An International Formula Master car has turned a lap of 1:27.455 in qualifying at Valencia. That's 0.3 seconds faster than the Formula 2 pole lap. (Thanks to Pat W)

Customer cars and four-car teams: the solution?

2009-05-20T08:37:00.000-07:00

What if Formula 1 allowed customer cars and more than two cars per team? It would be cheap for small teams like iSport and Campos Racing to buy an old McLaren to run, and learn how to be a proper Formula 1 team. And economies of scale would make it cheaper for a manufacturer to run three, even four cars (perhaps Formula 1 could allow one team to run different liveries, in order to maximize the sponsorship potential?). Of course, there should be no budget caps and nonsense like that, but manufacturers could make a lot of money back by being able to sell and service their cars and have more sponsorship space.

There is nothing new, nothing blasphemous in what I have just proposed. Let's take a look at the first Formula 1 race at Monaco in 1950. The entry list had a mixture of manufacturers and private entrants. Alfa Romeo was the dominant car of the day, and they fielded three cars. Likewise, there were three cars from Scuderia Ferrari, led by Alberto Ascari. Maserati took a different approach. There was a works team with two cars, but two other teams, Scuderia Achille Varzi and Enrico Plate, entered a pair of Maserati 4CLT-48 each. Scuderia Milano entered yet another Maserati. There were six Talbot-Lago cars entered by five teams, two private ERAs, a two-car effort from Simca Gordini, and a lone Cooper T12. In total, there were seven different models of Formula 1 cars being entered by 25 drivers. 21 would go on to qualify and 7 finished the race.

A lap at Monaco

2009-05-16T09:33:00.000-07:00

While the battle for control of Formula 1 continues, I'd like to turn our attention to Monaco, the site of the next Grand Prix. Everyone knows this is the "crown jewel" on the Formula 1 calendar, but driving on it you really understand why.

Monaco might be the slowest of the Formula 1 circuits, but it does not feel slow when you are driving within inches of the guardrails. You always feel like you're on your limit. There's no run-off to save you when you make a mistake. With no driving aids, I managed a lap at 1:18.135, which would have qualified me 17th at the 2007 Grand Prix.

At the start of the lap, you'll cross the track from the right to the left, heading towards Sainte Devote, a quick right-hander with curbing on the apex that you'll have to attack if you want to maintain speed for the all-important straightaway. Well, it's not really a straightaway, but it's flat out going uphill, and you'll be bouncing from one side of the circuit to the other as you negotiate the slight bends known as Beau Rivage. On the top of the hill, you'll be in seventh gear, and it's a very fast left-hander called Massenet. It is kind of a combination of two corners, but basically it gets tighter. Then you have to endure the massive bumps in this area as you go around Casino, a right-hander. I've heard that the bravest drivers will take these corners with hardly any braking, and that's why they're superhuman.

Believe it or not, you can breathe slightly as you drive down the short straight to Mirabeau Haute, one of the slowest corners that might be taken in 2nd gear. Next, you go downhill into the Grand Hotel hairpin, the tightest corner to be taken in 1st gear and maximum steering lock. Then you just thread your way in 1st or 2nd gear through the downhill Mirabeau Bas and Portier, before you find yourself alongside the sea.

It's another race up the gears as you go into the tunnel. Even though it's flat out, there is a sharp-ish bend in the middle of the tunnel that you need to be mindful of. After going back out into daylight, watch for the brake markers and brake heavily into the Nouvelle chicane. The entry is slow, the exit is fast, and you need to attack the curbs here for the best lap.

The next corner, Tabac, is very fast: just a quick downshift and a tap on the brakes will get through you it. Then you accelerate towards the swimming pool, enter the chicane Louis Chiron almost flat out, and then brake for the slower Piscine chicane.

The last set of corners are pretty unique. It's made a bit simpler because they're all in 1st or 2nd gear, and you just need to ensure that your car holds together and you're giving it as much throttle as you dare. Rascasse is the hairpin where Michael Schumacher stopped his car during qualifying in 2006. Antony Noghes is a slow, awkward corner in front of the pit entrance that takes you back to the start/finish straight.