How to improve Formula One

Matt Bishop: Let's start with TV, because it's so important in terms of getting the fan base back. Jim, what do you need to make Formula 1 put more bums on sofas?

Jim Rosenthal: First of all, continuity of coverage. Some races are done by Bernie's organisation and some aren't, which means viewers can't be sure whether they'll get a polished show each weekend.

Jim Wright: I think we're a long way behind NASCAR and some other forms of motorsport in terms of the use of on-board cameras and production.

JR: Yeah, I think other areas of motorsport open their doors almost 100 per cent to whatever television wants. F1 preserves its privacy which, actually, I respect. But the director should have access to all on-boards. To be told: "You've got only him, him and him" is frustrating.

JW: One mistake we make is to assume the viewer has a great deal of knowledge. A large proportion of the TV audience are just channel-flicking and we need to retain them.

Mike Gascoyne: It's overly complex. You've got to have something that the viewer can just watch and understand. Both with qualifying [the way it was earlier this year] and, to some extent, the racing, it's difficult to know what the hell's going on. And the graphics are awful.

Christian Horner: It's been hard enough for us to follow it on the pit wall.

JR: Single-lap qualifying has never been a good spectacle. And with that disastrous Sunday session, I found myself coming on and saying, "I'd better just tell you what's happened and who's on pole this morning." I hated it. You'd think that major TV companies - paying, as we have, the thick end of $275 million through to the end of 2010 - might have been given a little bit of notice, but it came as a horrible shock to us when that system came in.

Tiago Monteiro: It's not like these problems are impossible to fix, though - as we now see.

JR: The thing is, qualifying is important for teams, drivers and hardcore fans - but in reality, for every viewer watching qualifying you get four watching the race.

MB: Have this year's great races been reflected in the viewing figures?

JR: Well, British viewing figures are on a steady curve in the right direction. In Germany they're down as much as 30 per cent, which tells its own story. For us, this season, because of the way it started and the scoring system, can't fail to be a good one.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

• Bernie's Formula One Management TV to cover all grands prix
• Better and more extensive use of on-board cameras
• Better and more inventive use of graphics
• Qualifying to retain a Saturday-only single-session format
• TV companies to be kept in the loop on major decisions

MB: People often forget the paying spectator. What should we be giving them? Tiago, compared to what you're used to in the States, you must have a very quiet weekend?

TM: Exactly. In NASCAR, the drivers do a lot of PR and promotion. In Champ Car we'd sign autographs in shopping centres and give a few tickets away. Of course, it's busy and sometimes you don't feel like it. But when you have over 300,000 people at some races, it's worth it. Then again, in F1 the number of technical briefings means we're just as busy, but with the team, not fans.

MB: Mike, how much of that time could you cede to fan time?

MG: As much as we have to. If we're told, "Your driver has to be here to sign autographs at this time," then he will be and you get round it.

TM: The other thing NASCAR does is allow pit access. Fans pay a little extra - it's still a lot cheaper than F1 - and get really close.

CH: Red Bull's prime interest is in reaching the man in the grandstand, so we do need a little bit more accessibility for the fans.

JW: I agree, but with one note of caution: sponsors pay for their exclusive access. HP, for example, bring guests along because it's a 'money can't buy' situation to be in Paddock Club and the garage, and we need to protect that. Fridays, though, could be people's day: get the fans down the pit lane and have drivers signing autographs for an hour or so at the merchandising stands.

JR: But if we want fans on a Friday we can't cheat them. We can't tell Spain, for example, to take Friday off work and then have Alonso go out for just five laps.

MG: Make it a testing day. If you've got six hours of Formula 1 cars going round, people are going to turn up and watch it. Plus, new drivers need to learn the circuit and their trade. At the moment, rookies like Tiago can't run for one-and- a-half sessions because they've got to look after their engines.

TM: Sure. In Bahrain I did maybe 16 laps on the Friday.

MG: He's lucky - he's got a Toyota engine so he's doing more laps than most.

TM: That's true. But really it's bad for everyone at the moment.

JW: What about Sunday morning? I think it's important that the crowd see youngsters coming through different disciplines, so they can follow a guy up to F1.

MG: GP2 have made some cock-ups, but there's plenty going on and they have two races over the weekend: that's better value for money than F1.

JW: Do we all agree that we need to have F1 cars out on Sunday morning, too?

MG: Yeah. The warm-up used to be a great event. Half-an-hour of absolutely frenetic action. People shunted... it was ridiculous! Absolutely balls-out.

JW: And it always gave a buzz to the audience, too, didn't it?

CH: You would have to do it with the third car, though, if you wanted to stick with this race-fuel qualifying scenario.

MG: Well. that just underlines what a blind alley we've gone down with qualifying.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

• Fridays to become an unrestricted full-day's testing
• Cheap access for fans on Fridays with optional-extra pit access
• Compulsory autograph sessions for drivers on Fridays
• Bring back Sunday morning warm-ups
• Keep the Sunday morning GP2 race

MB: Okay, what are we going to do about qualifying? Bernie says he's fundamentally opposed to anything other than the old system. Do we agree?

JW: We went to single-lap qualifying to give the smaller teams a more visible presence on TV. But there's no evidence that any team have brought in more money because of it. So, we made a rule that has had no effect and we need to get rid of it again.

JR: That's a very good point. But with the old system nothing would happen for the first 20 minutes and people switched off.

JW: Why not just say everyone's got to make their first run within the first 15 minutes?

MG: You don't need to. If you could run old tyres and have unlimited laps, everyone would go straight out and check their car on old tyres. You didn't, only because the track was going to get quicker and you had only four sets of tyres.

CH: I agree with Mike. But the 12-lap system had a lot of merits. It built into a crescendo. A driver would put a time down and others would have to go out and respond. I don't think you necessarily need non-stop action for an hour, and even if you don't get track action early that may give TV better access to the teams.

MB: Tiago, is the current qualifying a disappointment to you, as a driver?

TM: It's a shame, yeah. And to have fewer tyres than we ever had in other categories is crazy. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle. Also, you have to be so careful with your engine. It's all a bit contradictory.

CH: What do we think about tyres then?

MG: Slicks.

TM: You'd be less dependent on the downforce; more mechanical grip.

MG: Grooved tyres don't look right on a racing car. The whole point of them was to control speed, then the FIA stopped using them to control speed and changed the cars again. It cost a lot and we're still going quicker. Just go to a controlled slick tyre.

CH: That's a key point: a controlled tyre would avoid so much testing. I reckon 90 per cent of testing is tyre-related.

MB: Tyre wars can be great, but you could still have great battles with a controlled tyre if you had a few specs at each race.

JW: You'd have to communicate that. You could do it with different coloured sidewalls, although we did that back in the '80s and it wasn't great.

TM: Champ Car is doing that this year.

CH: Everyone is protective about the tyre they're running, but it should be declared.

MG: And mix it up. If you get it wrong, you could change it at pit stops and declare that.

MB: Is improving overtaking an area we want to address?

MG: It's bloody difficult. One thing you can't do is un-invent technology. If you say reduce aerodynamics, yeah, you can do it, but you're still going to work all year in the wind tunnel.

JW: It's more a factor of circuit design. Hockenheim used to be a crap race; now it's fantastic because there's real overtaking.

CH: A slick tyre would help. And I think we should look at increasing braking distances. Fans want to see wheel-to-wheel racing, man and machine on the limit of adhesion.

MG: I'm not sure about the braking distance thing. And great racing is not necessarily lots of overtaking. Schumacher didn't overtake Alonso [at Imola] but everybody says it was the best bit of motor racing on TV for ages. Apart from your viewers, Jim, after you stuck those adverts in!

JR: I don't think it's a lack of overtaking that has people looking for other sports or driving people away. It's lack of competition. One-sided sport is dull.

MG: Ferrari have to take some blame, for putting everything behind one driver.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

• Old-style low-fuel quali with a rule to ensure TV screens aren't blank
• F1 to remain the pinnacle of motorsport technology
• Bring back tyre changes in pit stops
• Controlled slick tyres with a choice of spec at each race
• Control speed with tyres, not with cars or engines

MB: Cost-cutting: what's the best way forward?

MG: Just ban all testing during the season and test on Fridays. The easiest way to save money on an F1 car is not to run it. Winter testing can be done with the race team so you can get rid of the test team and the salaries that go with it.

MB: Christian, do you agree?

CH: I think it makes a great deal of sense. Even 30 days in a season is an enormous amount. Personnel are being pushed to breaking point. You'll never stop engineers spending money, but it would create a more level playing field to have the teams unable to buy such an advantage through track time.

MB: So, if someone's got $400 million to spend, they will, but we're trying to create a situation where they'll only go a tiny bit quicker than if they spend $200 million.

MG: Exactly. Or you could just cap budgets.

JW: How do you do that in Formula 1?

MB: In a post-Enron world I'm sure there are auditors who could do the job.

JW: How do you stop Philip Morris and Vodafone paying Michael Schumacher's salary for promotional purposes so it doesn't show in the Ferrari budget? Michael can say he drives for one euro. You can't police it.

CH: The governing body needs to get involved and limit testing.

JW: But you need the governing body and the promoters to be in synch here, looking at the big picture, bringing costs down while keeping the sport appealing to the public. Then you draw up your weekend timetable and your sporting and technical regulations under that framework. That's where it all goes wrong in my opinion. Someone comes up with an idea for qualifying, and then someone else says something about tyres. It's never looked at as a whole, so the wrong decisions are made.

MG: The limited engine thing is a classic. Someone says, "Let's increase the life of the engine to reduce costs" and no one thinks what that would mean at the weekend. Then the FIA say, "We can't get involved in testing", and everyone's rushing around spending millions on testing. If you just said: to enter F1 you can't go testing during the season and you can't use more than two engines on a weekend, that's 40 engines for the year. There you go - it's not difficult.

JW: The current engine regulations impact commercially, too. In Monaco 2004 we had Ralf blow an engine, qualify second on Saturday, then appear in the press conference during which we had to explain to our guests that actually he'd be lining up 12th. It's just ridiculous.

JR: Also, Jim, just to pick up on that, the one thing that drives viewers away from any sport is the "What's happened there, then?" moment.

JW: Tiago, how do you explain to your sponsors, "Oh, I didn't go well today because I was restricted to 17,500rpm"?

TM: They really don't understand. I struggle to explain why I'm only doing 15 or 16 laps on a Friday as a rookie. It's an awkward, frustrating situation for everyone.

MG: But we don't restrict Toyota engines, Jim!

RECOMMENDED ACTION

• FIA to limit testing to GP Fridays during the season
• Engine limit to be two per weekend

MB: One major stumbling block is that Ferrari will never vote for a test limit because they've got two test tracks.

MG: That's true. So... what... have we all now got to build test tracks just to be competitive? It's got to stop.

MB: If you got rid of the unanimity votes, it could stop. And to do that all we need is a new Concorde Agreement. So it's do-able.

MG: Yes, but by doing a deal with Ferrari, the FIA have taken away that opportunity before we even get started.

JW: Correct.

JR: Absolutely. The sport has got to where it is to a large extent by an absolutely brilliant sporting dictator, but perhaps now it's the time to move it on from that.

MG: The sport has moved on. It can't be run with the dodgy deals down the back street any more.

MB: Perhaps not even behind smoked glass at Prince's Gate [where Bernie Ecclestone's Formula One Management is based]?

RECOMMENDED ACTION

• New Concorde Agreement to be 'fair'
• An end to the Max 'n' Bernie show?

We want to hear from you!

Let us know what you would like to see from us in the future.

Take our survey

- The Autosport.com Team

Read and post comments