F1 Racing - UK (2019-12)

FINISHING STRAIGHT

THE FINAL LAP

“I did it because wehave

a responsibility to preserve

the DNA,” said Wolff.“It felt

wrong, not to preserve an

advantage – because maybe

it would have been good for

us as Ferrariwould have

been behind uswhen you

look at current qualifying

pace. Ivotedagainst it

because when you’re looking at theOlympic 100m final, you’re not

making Usain Bolt start five metres behind just tomake it exciting.”

This is sheer cant, with a side order of whataboutery. More than

that, it’s naked self-interest hidingbeneath a flag ofconvenience.

If you think Toto kicked this one intothe longgrass purely out of

altruism, you’ll believe anything.

As the Blessed Toto gathered his vestments and retreated to the

rectory, Ross Brawn respondedwith understandable peevishness.

“I thought it was afascinating contest,” hesaid. “And the drivers were

a little bit nervous, whichI can understand,

but we were justasking for the opportunity

for three races totry the format. Ifit doesn’t

work, weput our hands up;if it does work,

great. If it’ssomething in between,we can

work with [that] just tohelp us develop the

format of racing. And it’s frustrating that

we’ve not been able to dothat, but I think

that’s – unfortunately– the classicproblem

with Formula 1.”

Isn’tit just? Qualifying races may not be

therightanswer,butaswelooktoachanging

future and an evolving demographic,F1

nee ds to be able to ask the right questions

as a startingpoint. From there the right

answers may come. But so long as the right

of veto restswith corporatefunctionaries,

who answer to boardsand bottom lines

rather than motor racing’saudience, any

change will always be nixed or diluted.

OneofFormula1’sgreatestcontradictions is

that, while it’s a hotbed of technical innovation and

continuous change, the people who actually call

theshotsarechange-phobictoanalmosthysterical

degree. Worse still, since Bernie Ecclestone short-

sightedly granted theteams a voice in decision-

making,the blunt hand of tawdry self-interest has

crushed many new ideas atthe embryonic stage.

Older readers andtriv ia whizzes will recall

that Elvisdied on the toilet. Well, despite an

extraordinarily long sitting, and a copious amount

of heaving and straining,F1 has managedto pass

the 2021 regulations without suffering a heart

attack. Sadly, one of themore interesting ideas

that could have been implemented, and which was

mooted to betrialled next year,has fallen foul of

the it-can’t-be-done crowd.

The phrase “reversed grids” naturally causesa

collectiveshriek among ‘purists’, but theconcept

put forward by Libertywasn’t quite thegimmick

those in opposition made out. No less a brain than

Ross Brawn thought itworthwhileto eva luate a

different qualifying format at two or threeevents

next season,for which thegrid would be setbya

qualifying race in which the fieldwent off inthe

reverse of their championshiporder.

Still, thevery mention of “reversed grids”evokes

that automatic, Pavlovian response. Butif you

were suffering a bout ofthe tremors at thesheer

effrontery ofsuch a thing, fear not – your saviour

is at hand in theform of Mercedes boss Toto Wolff,

who, along with anun-named team principal,

vetoed itat a meeting before theMexican GP.

2021: VETOES

AND VESTED

INTERESTS...

PICTURE

:JERR

YANDRE

.ILLUSTRATION

:BENJAMIN

WA

CHENJE

@CoddersF1 facebook.com/f1racingmag

PICTURES

114 F1 RACING DECEMBER 2019

STUART CODLING

FLAT

CHAT

{ {

FULL THROTTLE

MUSINGS WITH

Formula1 fi nall ymanaged

toge tits2021regulations

passedandshowedthem

offtothemediainAustin

“IF YOU THINKTOTO

KICKED THIS ONE

INTO THELONG GRASS

PURELY OUT OF

ALTRUISM,YOU’LL

BELIEVE ANYTHING”

FINISHING STRAIGHT

THE FINAL LAP

“I did it because wehave

a responsibility to preserve

the DNA,” said Wolff.“It felt

wrong, not to preserve an

advantage – because maybe

it would have been good for

us as Ferrariwould have

been behind uswhen you

look at current qualifying

pace. Ivotedagainst it

because when you’re looking at theOlympic 100m final, you’re not

making Usain Bolt start five metres behind just tomake it exciting.”

This is sheer cant, with a side order of whataboutery. More than

that, it’s naked self-interest hidingbeneath a flag ofconvenience.

If you think Toto kicked this one intothe longgrass purely out of

altruism, you’ll believe anything.

As the Blessed Toto gathered his vestments and retreated to the

rectory, Ross Brawn respondedwith understandable peevishness.

“I thought it was afascinating contest,” hesaid. “And the drivers were

a little bit nervous, whichI can understand,

but we were justasking for the opportunity

for three races totry the format. Ifit doesn’t

work, weput our hands up;if it does work,

great. If it’ssomething in between,we can

work with [that] just tohelp us develop the

format of racing. And it’s frustrating that

we’ve not been able to dothat, but I think

that’s – unfortunately– the classicproblem

with Formula 1.”

Isn’tit just? Qualifying races may not be

therightanswer,butaswelooktoachanging

future and an evolving demographic,F1

nee ds to be able to ask the right questions

as a startingpoint. From there the right

answers may come. But so long as the right

of veto restswith corporatefunctionaries,

who answer to boardsand bottom lines

rather than motor racing’saudience, any

change will always be nixed or diluted.

OneofFormula1’sgreatestcontradictions is

that, while it’s a hotbed of technical innovation and

continuous change, the people who actually call

theshotsarechange-phobictoanalmosthysterical

degree. Worse still, since Bernie Ecclestone short-

sightedly granted theteams a voice in decision-

making,the blunt hand of tawdry self-interest has

crushed many new ideas atthe embryonic stage.

Older readers andtriv ia whizzes will recall

that Elvisdied on the toilet. Well, despite an

extraordinarily long sitting, and a copious amount

of heaving and straining,F1 has managedto pass

the 2021 regulations without suffering a heart

attack. Sadly, one of themore interesting ideas

that could have been implemented, and which was

mooted to betrialled next year,has fallen foul of

the it-can’t-be-done crowd.

The phrase “reversed grids” naturally causesa

collectiveshriek among ‘purists’, but theconcept

put forward by Libertywasn’t quite thegimmick

those in opposition made out. No less a brain than

Ross Brawn thought itworthwhileto eva luate a

different qualifying format at two or threeevents

next season,for which thegrid would be setbya

qualifying race in which the fieldwent off inthe

reverse of their championshiporder.

Still, thevery mention of “reversed grids”evokes

that automatic, Pavlovian response. Butif you

were suffering a bout ofthe tremors at thesheer

effrontery ofsuch a thing, fear not – your saviour

is at hand in theform of Mercedes boss Toto Wolff,

who, along with anun-named team principal,

vetoed itat a meeting before theMexican GP.

2021: VETOES

AND VESTED

INTERESTS...

PICTURE

:JERR

YANDRE

.ILLUSTRATION

:BENJAMIN

WA

CHENJE

@CoddersF1 facebook.com/f1racingmag

PICTURES

114 F1 RACING DECEMBER 2019

STUART CODLING

FLAT

CHAT

{ {

FULL THROTTLE

MUSINGS WITH

Formula1 fi nall ymanaged

toge tits2021regulations

passedandshowedthem

offtothemediainAustin

“IF YOU THINKTOTO

KICKED THIS ONE

INTO THELONG GRASS

PURELY OUT OF

ALTRUISM,YOU’LL

BELIEVE ANYTHING”