Why F1 won't get better this season

The first question anyone who knows I have an interest in Formula 1 asks is, 'Will 2018 be better than last season'?

My answer is very simple: why would it be? The people that can do something about the show have done nothing, and unless you are into the razzmatazz of pre- or post-event functions, I'm not sure I see any significant change on the horizon.

Formula 1 is not a sport. It is a huge business that brings employment to tens of thousands of people, whether they are working for a team or in the supply chain industry. If only because of this, it needs to be attractive to the viewer and the enthusiast otherwise the result is simple. People will switch off and more sponsors will move on, leading to a reduction in revenue that will drive teams away from the sport because either their return on investment is inadequate or they can't make ends meet.

The casual viewer needs to be able to switch on the TV and more or less immediately pick up something interesting and exciting to attract and hold their attention, particularly now there are hundreds of TV channels and many other distractions.

If you take the rough hour-and-a-half of a grand prix in general, that will very seldom happen. A few minutes at the start, and that's it for drama other than the odd random minute or two during the event, which is down to pot luck.

So why is this, and is it new or has it been around since the days of chariot racing? Well to some extent it has. There have always been the big boys and the rest, but in the past a surprise result over a race weekend or even in the championship was possible. Now it would take a miracle.

The cream will always rise to the top, so the best teams will always end up with the best drivers, engineers, designers and mechanics. They are therefore more likely to be the winners, so they have a vested interest in thwarting change. But something needs to be done to make it that little bit more random and unpredictable, or if not that, at least more exciting on the way even if it reaches an expected conclusion.

I don't think anyone wants overtaking 10 times a lap. But just that bit more suspense would be good. More of the unexpected will help keep viewer's attention, even just the realistic expectation that something surprising might happen.

To try to understand what 'dominance' really is, I have had a look over the constructors' and drivers' championship for the past 20 years.

I've calculated the top five seasons by the highest points percentage and to give it some context and to see how big the margins were, I've listed the top three teams and the top three drivers in each of the championships.

The five most dominant constructors' championships

Top three ordered by their % of maximum points available

The five most dominant drivers' championship

Top three ordered by their % of maximum points available

I've also listed the lowest five years just to show how close it has been - or could be.

The five closest constructors' championships

Top three ordered by their % of maximum points available

The five closest drivers' championships

Top three ordered by their % of maximum points available

I've chosen 1998 to 2017 because during this period there was also three different rates of points allocation for finishing positions. So this also gives us a chance to see if that had any effect on the result.

So, what do all those numbers mean? They show that over the past 20 years, nothing has changed the fact that the best drivers driving the best cars will always get the best results. So, this isn't a new problem that has just popped up.

The alterations to the points allocation has done very little. But the step from 25 for a win to 18 for second (introduced in 2010) is a bit too much; I would change it to 22 for a win. Retrospectively retooling my spreadsheet this way doesn't alter any championship outcomes but it does make some closer. That would have changed the intensity of the pressure on the drivers and teams at the time.

Fundamentally, what we need is more cars and drivers being competitive. And if we have that, it should lead to more winners. The big question is what is going to make that happen when the teams are all operating from their own individual cocoon and none of them can see the big picture.

There are a few things that I would instigate with immediate effect. If any team doesn't like it, then then they can take the points hit by not complying or just stay at home

If a few of them were to step out of the bubble, they would realise very quickly that life would go on without Formula 1. But the companies that pay them handsomely wouldn't exist without the sponsors, viewers and enthusiasts who want more excitement. On the way to what needs to be a set of clean-sheet regulations for 2021 that will allow closer racing and the smaller teams to be competitive and fight for podium positions as opposed to best of the rest, something around the outside needs to be done to spice up the potential show.

At the same time, it should also reduce budgets. But the team leading the discussions to make that happen comprises people that were, in their day, all involved with teams that created the domination my numbers show; they were (and probably still are, given the opportunity) some of the biggest spenders involved in the sport.

There are a few things that I could instigate with immediate effect. If any team doesn't like it, then they can take the points hit by not complying or just stay at home. Change is for the good of the overall show, and won't initially suit everyone. But through time, these things normally balance out.

1 Limit on development parts

Front wing, rear wing, underfloor, barge boards and brake ducts specification need to do a minimum of five consecutive races. What you arrive with in Australia needs to do the next five races. Adjustments on front and rear wing levels are permitted, but not specification changes. One wildcard change of specification of all these components is permitted per season, just in case a team screws up. This is mainly about saving money, but it would also help the smaller teams to not get out-developed by the bigger, better-funded teams.

2 Alter the points system

I would change the awarding of points to 22-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1. This is to attempt to reduce the chance of the race winner getting too big a points advantage early in the season. It won't change the outcome much, but it will mean that the pressures on the drivers and teams will alter slightly.

3 Post-qualifying set-up privileges

We now have the big three teams: Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull. So normally (other than penalties) that's the front six grid positions gone. So, from seventh fastest in qualifying backwards, teams would be allowed to alter the set-up of their cars.

Front and rear downforce levels, including removal or addition of Gurney flaps; vertical spring rates by changing spring/torsion bars; roll rates by changing anti-roll bar stiffness; ride heights; damper settings; suspension by adjustment or addition/removal of packers; and wheel alignment, including cambers, can all be adjusted. But the specification of the components cannot be changed, only their stiffness.

These changes can be carried out in the hour before the pitlane opens on race day, and a complete list of each team's changes should be passed to the FIA and all media outlets before any changes.

This is to allow the teams from seventh-fastest downwards a chance to fight back. And it will also give the media something to talk about, as opposed to track limits.

4 Relax track limits rules

Until a more technologically oriented track limit system can be introduced, track limits should be a thing of the past. If there is a bit of asphalt, gravel or grass, and you want to drive on it, then get on with it.