Ben Hur gave us a race to remember. It had overtaking, cheating, near-death experiences for all competitors, and a frothing at the mouth, blood hungry audience to cheer on the valiant charioteers.
Now while we did not have fan interviews after the race, it's a fair bet this (fictional) crowd ambled home discussing the actual events of the afternoon, rather than the legal size of the axles, the minimum weight of a chariot or the questionable use of "advanced hay" as horse food to power past the opposition. Yes what actually transpired within the race would have been the major topic of excitement and discussion.
Schumacher rolling into Hill's path in Adelaide might not have been the most sporting of moves (or accidents) but here we are many years later and this actual on track, in the race, incident can still be recalled and discussed with animation and fervour by fans around the world.
The precise car defining rules of that year escape me without going to a formal reference, with the exception of the engine, which was loud and frightening as it should be, and the wheels which were clearly wide and grippy, also just as it should be.
So since Ben Hur got it so right, a tradition of racing spanning thousands of years as it were, when did the rule makers go so wrong? Now it seems that we all forget the action from the past season (Lewis won nearly every race, all Tilke-penned corners look the bloody same, only fortnightly variations to anticipate being the totally illogical choice of podium interviewer), while obsessing over rules, and their agreed interpretation.
Pre-season excitement? Is Haas following the rules on being supplied by Ferrari, and how we count wind tunnel hours, or are they being naughty? Not for us the romantic-period excitement of a dawn duel as now captured by the America's Cup... where the current cup holder throws down the gauntlet by framing the entire match as "Meet me at this stretch of water at dawn with a bloody big boat and we will see who is master of the waves matey!" No arguing about who is exceeding what salary cap while using one too many super computers.
So how do we return to the path of virtue and enlightenment whereby we go back to focusing on the racing action?
Without question, simplification, and handing the role of policing the whole endeavour back to the not-for-discussion laws artfully drawn by Miss Physics.
Miss Physics has a strong no nonsense policy for providing precisely the same bounding laws to all who care to reside in this Universe. No exceptions, no cheating, no platinum frequent flyer promotion to the head of the queue. Not even take it or leave it. While she is demure and polite, Miss Physics does not take ‘no’ from anyone when it comes to compliance with her laws. She can be somewhat obsessive in her even-handedness one might say. And she is beyond corruption. One can walk or run up to the edge of one of her laws. One can bounce harshly off one of her laws. Yet one can never break one of her laws.
Sounds like the perfect police enforcement agency to me. So how do the FIA and Formula One get Miss Physics on the pay roll? Well it is amazingly simple. She asks for no remuneration, she works 24/7 without argument, and she never asks for holidays. All she asks is that you clearly recognise where she has drawn the line and behave accordingly.
Easy, right?
Well apparently not. We humans are oh so capable of complicating every aspect of life in this universe. The more of us involved, the more perceived power - remember it ultimately resides with quiet Miss Physics, regardless of how hard you try to make yourself the centre of your own little universe - and especially the more money - of no interest to Miss Physics remember - then we get in our own way and over complicate our journey into our next grand mess. The FIA and those involved in running Formula One are especially good at placing themselves at the centre of their own contrived universes, and then thinking they make the rules and are God over their special creation.
So step one in our rework of the rules is to get out of our own way. Or rather get all the vested interests of all the little pretend Gods out of the way.
Next we need to have a serious heart-to-heart with Miss Physics. Which of her lovingly crafted laws do we want to most clearly apply to our modest chariot race?
I put at number one on the list, safety. First for the drivers, then team members, and then all those at the track. Deformable crash structures, geometric compatibility between cars, and no nasty sharp bits, or unintentionally detachable high speed missiles, would appear to top our necessary rule list.
So crash tests and survival cells need the simplest defining words we can craft. Then we need to define maximum and minimum mass of the car, driver, and fuel trinity. Ah fuel. I recommend we say no to nuclear, and anything truly toxic in the event of an accident. Beyond that... Go on, be creative!
Now we need to define a three dimensional shape within which it must all fit, and the points of geometric compatibility we want to ensure trackside safety measures are effective, and that inter-vehicle crashes give each driver involved maximal protection.
Next we need a refuelling rule, and tyres rulings... Or do we? Surely encouraging the mix between multiple sprints on super soft tyres, compared to slow and steady as she goes with no pit stops is the sort of complex strategic trade-off we want to see teams sweating over during a race?
This is one area I think the FIA are actually pushing in the right direction. Allow Pirelli to develop a suite of tyres and the teams can specify in advance two types per race from a range all the way from super, super soft, right up to tough beasts with a chance of just about making a race distance. Now go figure. If it rains all teams have a standard issue intermediate and full wet, but can still only use the two dry tyres they have selected.
sign in