The motorsport 'gimmicks' that F1 should try

The aim of Formula 1's delayed rules reset remains improving its sporting product - the racing.

For too long events have suffered from a lack of overtaking, the same teams winning, little in the way of surprise. But, whisper it though, much of 2019, after the nadir of the French Grand Prix, was pretty good.

Nevertheless, the new cars, when they now do arrive in 2022, are intended to slash the negative effects of aerodynamics, with closer and more unpredictable races the desired outcome.

But with F1 having an enforced hiatus thanks to the coronavirus pandemic, it's worth considering other ways in which the championship could shake things up. So, as with our assessment of which F1 tracks might work in reverse, let's take an un-scientific look at the 'gimmicks' - often taken wrongly as an insult - implemented in other areas of motorsport that F1 could potentially adopt to add spice to its racing offering.

Attack Mode

Formula E's own reinvention with the arrival of the Gen2 machine - which did away with car swaps and introduced a bold new look to the electric championship in 2018-19 - came with a new twist for its racing.

The attack mode system isn't that far removed from other concepts that have already been tried in F1, with KERS for example. But attack mode mixes this with a joker lap/penalty box approach to ensure there is a disadvantage to taking the higher power setting.

Inspired by the Mario Kart video games - and series chairman Alejandro Agag knew exactly what he was doing when he first used that comparison in an interview with Autosport - it adds a visible strategic element to a form of racing with no pitstops.

As F1 teams already send their cars into higher or lower power modes depending on the race situations in front of them, this would merely add a tangible aspect - not to mention a nice bit of chaos (see every time 2015-16 FE champion Sebastien Buemi heads into an attack mode zone) - to that tactical technology battle.

Joker laps

If you hated the idea of F1 adopting attack mode, then this one probably isn't for you either. And yet the idea of incorporating an extra section of track to be taken once or twice in a grand prix shouldn't be dismissed immediately.

Many F1 fans yearn for refuelling to be reintroduced because they were fans of the racing it produced. This often led to cars 'racing' each other on other parts of the circuit to be ahead when the strategies played out. This led to legendary drives - such as Michael Schumacher's three-stopper win at the Hungaroring in 1998 - but it did usually mean a lack of wheel-to-wheel action.

A joker lap section in F1 would put focus back on the sprint element the championship has often lacked of late - provided the tyres allowed for constant pushing. But it would bring the cars back together more often, and without the added extra cost of carting the in-race refuelling equipment about (with the negative environmental message that also brings).

Multi-class racing

The warning from McLaren CEO Zak Brown that four teams could be lost due the consequences of the coronavirus shutdown is serious, and this entry isn't flippantly trying to make light of that risk. Such warnings simply must be heeded by F1's stakeholders.

But if F1 did need to bolster grid sizes then adding F2 machinery to grands prix might be a cost-effective way to do that, while giving the new generation of drivers an extra chance to shine. Of course, the cars from the lower category would need adapting to complete the full distance, but there is a historical precedent as F1 did occasionally do just this during the initial decades of the world championship.

Take Jacky Ickx's F2 performance at the 1967 German GP (above), where his qualifying time would have put him third on the grid overall, and he rose from 18th (as the F2 polesitter) to run as high as fifth before retiring with a suspension problem. As was noted by Gary Watkins in the 2 January 2020 issue of Autosport magazine: "Within weeks he was on his way to signing a contract with Ferrari for the following season."

Then there's the spectacle of seeing LMP1 cars carve their way past GT and LMP2 machines in the World Endurance Championship - that would be a great addition to F1's own exhibitions.

Driver changes

Obviously this one simply isn't going to fly in a traditional grand prix timeframe - and most of these ideas would probably best be served for experimental additional events rather than full-on replacements for 'normal' F1 races. At least at first...

But why not have a race where the winning car was driven by a crew of two or three drivers, who share the racing? All F1 squads have reserve drivers, so maybe adding them to the usual race drivers to form a one-car squad would create enough intrigue for a 10-car battle the day before the 'regular' grand prix.

F1 was already set to shake-up its weekend format for 2021, and shortened events might be a way to help the championship get a 2020 season off the ground. Plus, just because some people say things can't be done doesn't mean they have to be immediately ignored...

Again, there's historical examples of this happening in F1 - from Stirling Moss taking over Tony Brooks' Vanwall to win at Aintree in 1957, to Peter Collins giving up his Lancia-Ferrari to help Juan Manuel Fangio clinch the title at Monza the year before.

Varying race lengths

Continuing on the theme of borrowing from F1's past, one way of adding variation would simply be to alter race lengths. It wouldn't work to shorten grand prix distances, as fans would be short changed, and (as F1 may find out if it tries to host multiple races at the same venue in 2020/2021) holding two races at the same track brings a marketing headache for the teams that shouldn't be ignored.

So perhaps an option could be to make certain races much longer than others - say, a couple of three-hour 'endurance' tests spread throughout the calendar? Adding multiple drivers to one car as suggested above would also increase the spectacle.

Back when car-sharing was permitted by the rules, the conditions at the ultra-hot, three-hour 1955 Argentinean Grand Prix (above, with Moss racing for Mercedes) meant the majority of the finishing entries had been driven by more than one racer (Fangio and Roberto Mieres were the only solo finishers).

Of course, the cars don't tend to break as much these days, and there is a much greater focus on driver fitness. It's not uncommon to see drivers doing a three or even four-hour stint at Le Mans for example. But as with all of these whimsical ideas, it's at least worth considering - even if it's just for a moment.

Actual night races

Ok, yes, F1 definitely already has night races. But the darkness-incorporating events in Bahrain, Singapore and Abu Dhabi use massive, multiple, lighting arrays to effectively re-create daylight at those circuits.

Lucas di Grassi recently suggested adding headlights to FE cars for its Gen3 cycle change (and rumour has it that more than one FE manufacturer has already strapped lights to the Gen2 packages during the limited private powertrain development testing), and sportscar categories have of course raced at night for decades.

LMP1 cars can hit similar speeds to F1 machines, so maybe the time has come to make lighting tech a feature of the pinnacle of single-seaters. After all, it has direct relevance to road cars - commonly cited as a key area for F1 - although the TV product would inevitably suffer...

Reverse grids

This is not a new suggestion, and yet it's not as controversial as those who instantly dismiss it would have you think.

Setting the grid by qualifying order simply means the fastest cars start at the front and stay there in the race. There's just no way the slowest car can fight through in normal circumstances. The 2022 rules reset is intended to close up the field and increase overtaking, but the traditional method of setting the grid will still give the better packages an advantage.

Putting the quicker cars at the back arguably immediately fixes most of the overtaking problem and might produce memorable races similar to the 2005 Japanese GP - when a wet qualifying produced a jumbled-up grid with Ralf Schumacher's Toyota on pole from Jenson Button (BAR), Giancarlo Fisichella (Renault) and Christian Klien (Red Bull).

That year's title protagonists Fernando Alonso and Kimi Raikkonen started line astern in 16th and 17th positions, but Raikkonen memorably charged through to win with a final-lap pass on Fisichella, with Alonso completing the podium in third.

Now, all of this is a tongue-in-cheek assessment, and these are far from serious suggestions.

Indeed, in many cases safety considerations, a lack of spare parts, an unwillingness to damage prototype machinery, as well as time constraints, are all reasons why such approaches cannot be considered immediately feasible. For a good few of them, F1 teams would need to take more than two cars to each race - which just isn't an option, cost-wise.

But one of F1's greatest strengths - which is the case for all of motorsport - is the sense of adventure, wonder and glory that it creates. Racing captures the imagination with its intoxicating mixture of speed, human endeavour and bravery. As with all sports, people have to care for them to exist.

It's therefore worth thinking about how F1 can be lovingly tinkered with, even if it's just for a passing moment.