What F1 must learn from FE's attack mode

Formula 1 has long resisted radical change, so it's no surprise shivers are sent down many fans' spines when you mention the word gimmicks.

Considering the criticism that has floated around in recent days at the harmless new rule that offers a point for fastest lap, it's little wonder that F1's bosses don't want to go down the route of introducing reversed grids, success ballast or fan boost.

F1 sporting boss Ross Brawn has reiterated that ideas that spice up other categories are not good enough for grand prix racing.

"I personally think there are some references that we have to keep - the length of the race, and the nature of the race," he told Autosport. "I don't think reverse grids would be at the right level for F1. It works in other formulas, we know that from our own experience.

Is there a danger a watered down F1 overhaul, blocking out all gimmicks, would end up being a damp squib?

"But there are different requirements in F2 than F1. We're definitely not into gimmicks, we're into nurturing and developing the racing, and understanding what the fans enjoy, and seeing how we can give them more of what they enjoy with integrity. We don't want it to be gimmicky. Because I think that will turn fans off."

Brawn's comments come against the backdrop of Liberty Media's push for a bolder and more exciting F1 from 2021 - which should include a new financial structure and a more level playing field for all teams. But there are two key issues at stake here.

The first is that however positive Liberty's vision is for F1 as a whole, following through on what is being talked about does not suit all teams. Those at the front - especially teams such as Mercedes and Ferrari that command the biggest share of prize money and the biggest budgets - are not going to willingly sacrifice all of that and embrace a formula that will make it even harder for them to succeed.

With Liberty eager to get consensus on future rule changes, rather than be antagonistic and force them through with a 'like it or lump it' attitude, there is an increased chance that F1 may end up with compromise and not achieve all that had been hoped for.

What fans want from sport and entertainment is changing fast. Is there a danger that a watered down F1 overhaul, blocking out all gimmicks, would end up being a damp squib?

Just look at the momentum that Formula E is gaining at the moment during its stellar 2018/19 campaign. While its viewership and social media follower statistics are not yet a match for F1, its numbers are going in one direction - and the stampede of manufacturers in FE's direction is only going to further raise public awareness and drive even more interest.

What has been particularly fascinating about races early in the current FE season has been that scepticism about the use of gimmicks like attack mode has rapidly disappeared because it has added an extra layer of excitement to the racing.

Where once something like attack mode would have been mocked for being better suited to a computer game like Mario Kart rather than a serious motor race, it has actually proved no more intrusive or artificial than DRS in F1.

It has brought alive races that had the chance of looking too settled, and it has been implemented in an intelligent way. Having the details of the number, duration and minimum amount of times it can be used decided just one hour before the race has stopped teams being able to run simulations to find the optimum strategy, so it's thrown a bit of much-needed jeopardy into the mix.

Its acceptance suggests maybe that fans are more open to the idea of 'gimmicks' than they would have been years ago, and that may be especially true for the younger generation of motor racing followers that have grown up with computer games.

All sports are now having to wake up to the reality that computer games are now rivals when it comes to grabbing eyeballs. After all, people at home have a choice to make: turn on the TV to watch some sport or switch on the console.

Last year Netflix stated in an earnings report that the biggest threat to its audience figures did not come from rival networks, but a computer game.

The real issue is whether F1 needs to do more to ensure that races are regularly exciting. It's an impossible dream to expect every grand prix to be a thriller

"We compete with [and lose to] Fortnite more than HBO," a letter to Netflix shareholders said. "When YouTube went down globally for a few minutes in October, our viewing and sign-ups spiked for that time... There are thousands of competitors in this highly fragmented market vying to entertain consumers and low barriers to entry for those with great experiences."

Figures released by F1 recently revealed that the average age of a fan was 40 years old, which is similar to other global sports and leagues including football, NBA, NFL and tennis.

But those in charge in all sports know if they are to have a sustainable future then they need to keep attracting a younger audience. F1 has made some ground on this front in recent years thanks to an increased focus on social media and YouTube efforts since Liberty took over - with 36% of new fans being under 25. But alarm bells should be ringing that only 14% of its overall audience is in that age category.

F1's Esports push seem to be having greater success in pulling in the younger audience, with 80% of its audience under the age of 35 and 56% younger than 25.

The key is getting those youngsters to follow through and watch F1 itself - but doing that will rely on the action being top notch. If grands prix are boring, and the championship battle is too predictable, there will be little motivation to turn the consoles off and watch the F1 action for two hours on a Sunday afternoon.

The real issue though is whether F1 needs to do more to ensure that races are regularly exciting, because it is an impossible dream to expect every race to be a guaranteed thriller. But how far should it push to try to artificially stimulate things?

Brawn is right that one of F1's strengths is its history and tradition; and it has benefited from shying away from going too far down the gimmick route. More radical ideas, like double points for the season finale or elimination qualifying, always caused a kick-back from fans and teams and were quickly abandoned.

But while those already tuning in may not like the idea of gimmicks - as market research shows - what about those that aren't following F1 now? What is needed to get them onboard so the audience gets bigger?

A few months ago, I'd have said ideas like attack mode should have no place in an F1 that has always been about purity.

But if we now accept that Fortnite is a rival to getting future fans on board, which even Liverpool Football Club has admitted is a factor in recent days, perhaps it's time for a rethink about what needs to happen on a Sunday afternoon to get people to switch off their PlayStations and turn F1 on instead.