Ferrari boss Luca di Montezemolo has mentioned several times in recent weeks he wants F1 teams to be able to run three cars in 2010 in the hope that he can lure Michael Schumacher back to drive.
FIA president Max Mosley has scoffed at the idea, dismissing it as “fantasy”. But would you like to see bigger teams and larger grid sizes?
Should F1 teams be allowed to run three cars?
- No opinion (4%)
- No (54%)
- Yes (42%)
Total Voters: 2,997
As I’ve already explained before, I’m not keen on the idea of ‘three-car’ teams. In short, it feels like a ‘quick-fix’ solution to the threat of dwindling team numbers, and one that would cause more problems in the long-term.
I thought McLaren’s Martin Whitmarsh put a sensible explanation forward for the problems with three-car teams:
We need to be sensitive to the fact that if there were three Brawns, Red Bulls and McLarens here, then it doesn’t make it easier for the small teams. So we need to be willing and prepared to do third cars, but you should only do that if you have fewer teams present than we currently have.
Despite concerns over the future of Renault and possibly Toyota, with four new teams entering F1 in 2010 there doesn’t seem to be any immediate need to rush to three-car teams. Particularly if every team were to try to run three cars, increasing the field size theoretically to a new record of 42, which would cause logistical problems.
Although I like the idea of suddenly having 50% more cars in F1, I don’t like the three-car solution. What’s your take?
See more results of F1 Fanatic polls: F1 Fanatic polls archive
Read more: Why three-car teams isn’t a great idea
Kovy
20th September 2009, 7:24
I’d love it, the more the merrier.
It would definitely make it harder for small teams to achieve anything though.
I just want to see Schumi back :)
Ronman
20th September 2009, 22:03
imagine 42 nutcases at turn 1 at Spa….aaah the carnage….
mm
20th September 2009, 23:37
There would not be 42 cars, some of the tracks cannot take it, and some of the garages aren’t anywhere near big enough. It would require a cut back on the number of teams – which I don’t see the point. Sure if we were struggling with 5 teams on the grid, okay a couple of teams are rumoured to be leaving. But at the same time even if 4 teams dropped out before next season (although that would be sad) – we would still have the number of cars as we do now.
the Sri lankan
20th September 2009, 23:05
its a gamble to get Alonso in the 3rd car. not Schumi
Ninad
20th September 2009, 8:05
No. we have 14 teams so we do not need 3 cars…..
If number of teams were less, say 8 or less then we need 3 cars!!
HounslowBusGarage
20th September 2009, 9:34
I agree. It depends on how many teams actually turn up in Oz next year. If it’s 14, then demonstrably, we do not need three cars per team. However if Renault, Toyo, BMW/Whoever, Torro Rosso and one or two of the new teams don’t make it, we will need all the cars we can get to make any kind of race at all.
Pariscy
20th September 2009, 8:18
I can see both sides of the argument, and there can be a simple solution, not the best, but a simple and easy one.
At the forefront of the issue is the current cost cutting endeavor in F1, not a bad thing by itself, but let’s be honest. We follow Formula 1 in part (and that’s a big part) for it being at the pinnacle of technology and pushing the BEST drivers in the world to their limit and they in turn, pushing their BEST cars min the world to their limit. The departure of three team drivers in the middle of the 2009 season, and their replacement with drivers with total lack of F1 car experience, shows the need for a third driver to be experienced and up to date with the team’s latest equipment AND IT’S DRIVING. For those skeptical ones, the obvious argument would be safety. An inexperienced driver get’s in the car and on race day, has a drive of the sort of Badoer, only this time his actions cause an accident. How good would that be for anyone, the big teams, the small teams, the spectators, or the sponsors, or the fellow drivers that would be at increased risk of injury as a result.
So the simple answer is, allow the 3rd car in all European races, where the shipping costs for all teams are at the lowest, and allow each team to choose 3 or 4 non-European races that each individual team wants to take a 3rd car. Maybe all of them will choose the same races; I don’t think so. Each will choose races that they are about to bring massive new development in order to test it better, thus a better show for the fans, better preparation for the teams, and a much safer sport.
Michel S.
20th September 2009, 8:23
I voted no, because I did not see any proposal that link the establishment of three-car teams with an expansion of the points system.
e.g.
– constructor championship awarded on average points per team, not total (this would discourage 3-car teams from using their third car as a spoiler, though there’ll still be a slight advantage due to faster development, and spreading reliability concerns over more cars)
– points should be awarded down to a fixed percentage of the grid size. e.g. 40%-50%. This probably require the point intervals between each position to be standardized, so we can recompute the points easily as the grid size fluctuate year-by-year. Probably fix the points awarded to the top three positions, but readjust them below that.
Ubaid Parkar
20th September 2009, 8:26
As mentioned above, we have 14 teams now (13 is good enough as well if Renault is thrown out). Plus this is just a gimmickry. The sport can do without such petty shows!
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 8:29
The point of having three cars is a mad mad mad idea.
Why does di monty want to run Schumacher? We will definitely have FOUR world champions next year . When was the last time we’ve had four champs race together? Not even during the piquet-prost-senna-mansell era. This could be the dawn of a new era & yet maddy luca di monty wants back the “pastmaster” ? Why?
Why do they want to involve schumi in everything they do? Is it a veto or something?
Why are ferrari so reluctant to look to the future? Why give schumi another drive? Isn’t 7 Wdc enough? Its a mad mad mad idea that deserves to be heralded to trash.
Luca monty is a man with tonnes of false EGO. He needs to let of it to earn some lost respect. Every human in this world fantasizes something crazy at some point in time, but it would be so stupid to go out & tell it in the public domain. Luca di monty says smaller teams are useless & stuff, in case if he hadn’t noticed, his beloved ferrari was almost robbed of a win at spa & almost put to shame at monza by a team that operates at 25% budget that ferrari operates at. Luca instead of wasting his time on blabbing on three cars needs to ensure that ferrari come up with a competitive car for next season.
I think we must stop discussing about the three car theory. It will never happen. No one, except Ferrari are in favour of it. Big Boys Merc have made it very clear its nonsense, Once Ferrari faithful R.Brawn will not have much of a say in this matter, Merc have seen to that. I personally think ,schumi after all these years of cheating has lost his soul, its the perfect time for him to be doing some soul searching. Instead he chooses to stand & block upcoming drivers. What a pathetic man.
Maciek
20th September 2009, 9:24
I’m a Schumacher hater, and I want to see him back…
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 9:30
Why three car? There is a old saying which says:
To gain some,you’ve gotta lose some.
Its not that ferrari don’t have an option. they can always dump kimi or massa to make way for Mr Veto. Ferrari are so deeply in love with Mr Veto. I don’t think they will ever hesitate to dump anyone to make way for him.
Even I would love to see Mr Veto comeback & entertain us by making a fool of himself ;)
Martin
20th September 2009, 14:18
I remember in the old days mclaren ran a 3rd car at some events. There was some loophole that allowed it and they exploited it. Although I dont remember it giving them an sdvantage/.
Nick
20th September 2009, 14:21
why? so we can have two ferrari drivers pulling over for him?
Pradeek
20th September 2009, 11:02
I’ve read this same comment by you in another post. Anyway 3 cars for a single team will make life difficult for the 3rd driver. Already, we are seeing 1 car getting updates over another. With the 3rd car,it will make favouritism more predominant. Not at all good for F1.
Maksutov
20th September 2009, 13:01
makes perfect sense
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:37
Fair point Pradeek.
RFB
21st September 2009, 0:57
1999, with Schumacher, Hill, Villeneuve,and Hakkinen. Before that, you would actually have to go back a very long time ago, looks like it didn’t happen either in the 70’s or 80’s
AndrewT
20th September 2009, 8:48
i guess if he wants to run MSchumacher he just could have bought another team for as Red Bull did and loan out some drivers to make room for his meister, or even loaning Schumi out.
i don’t see a reason why all the teams should pay more for a third car (okay, it’s more efficient and economic to run 3 cars, relatively, but it raises the overall costs), if everyone is keen on cutting costs.
btw how do they think racing in monaco. and i’m not talkink about the udersized garages, rather you can’t run a lap without getting into traffic if there are 42 cars on the grid. 42! thats more than two times more than the current lineup. even 28 is crazy, 24-26 would be optimal, but 42…
considering that Räikkönen and Massa have a contract for 2010, possibly Alonso as well, not to mention Fisichella, MSchumacher, Gene and Badoer, why not run 7-car teams so that everyone in the team could race, or even a separated Ferrari-only championship…
i’m just mad about the ideas of the dinosaurs of the sport, like Montezemolo and Ecclestone, they have quite good ideas, but they should think about it before they use their power to get it implemented :S
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 9:13
Luci di monty will happily swap monaco with some tilke circuit. His beloved ferrari haven’t won a race there since 2001(that too only cuz coultard starting on pole stalled his car & mika had a suspension failure). And often in the past he has criticized monaco just like he did singapore last year. Luca di monty is a bad loser & so is Mr Veto. They don’t seem to prefer circuits where they under perform.
I guess this crazy idea originated from the mouth of Mr Veto. Sources within ferrari are suggesting that Mr Veto didn’t want to let go of his seat & instead was forced out to make way for kimi. Now that ferrari have learnt that kimi is not a team player & lacks motivation they fell obligated to give back that seat to Mr Veto.
What irritates me to most is that all this is being done in the name of cutting costs, where in actual reality it would only spiral costs out of control.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Mr Veto had a veto done back in 2006, for a drive in 2010.
What if the 3 car idea is implemented? What if ferrari have built a dog of a car for 2010 which gets lapped every 5 laps? What if they are subjected to humiliation by force india? What if mclaren have built a car that is 5 sec quicker than them? What if Mr Veto turns out to be another Badoer of 2010?
Would ferrari turn their backs on this 3 car theory??
I suspect they will, cuz they perform well only when the rules favour them.
AndrewT
20th September 2009, 9:49
well, it’s a bit extreme :)
back to MSch, i think he is more valuable for the Ferrari as a driver rather than an advisor or expert or whatever his overpaid job is.
however, after all these scandals and conspiracies i wouldn’t be surprised if MSch would have changed his mind after considering the performance of this years Ferrari. it would have been his weakest F1 car ever, maybe the 1991 Jordan was a bit weaker, but it’s not an option for a 7-times world champion that used to fight for wins (the other 19 used to try to fight for the 2nd place after him, i mean…). maybe the return-like announcement was just a marketing-move, which achieved it’s goal perfectly as so many tickets were bought for Valencia as it was never expected…
so let’s go through the factors:
– MSch is a goldmine for the marketing experts. you can sell the F1 again through him.
– MSch performs not so well as an advisor
– Ferrari has maybe 7 drivers (at least 6 for sure)
– this years efforts are played down after Massa’s accident. if they replaced MSch with Badoer this means they didn’t want anything from the season. maybe the decision was made before that, and that was another factor that made Schumi say “no”. a car that won’t be improved is not for him.
Ferrari and Monaco, yeah, obviously not a success-story. Monaco will stay either (as a perfect visualisation of poor, cost-cutting f1 :D), even if it’s inadequate for proper f1 races. i know it was just my example.
about the rules. there were always voices that emphasised the connection between FIA decisions and Ferrari. from 2003 there were a lots of changes that were meant to interrupt the hegemony of Ferrari, but didn’t help, so maybe these were only for guise. and now that a guy called Jean Todt has a good chance for being next FIA president, things can change again in favour of Ferrari.
(so Vatanen VS Todt = Formula-1 VS Ferrari?)
i have nothing against Ferrari in particular and would oppose the 3-car idea whoever would have came up with it, because it’s drastic, useless and expensive.
IDR
20th September 2009, 9:02
Well, Red Bull has four.
I would love to see a pair of Alfas competing again.
Luca should think about it!
mm
20th September 2009, 23:45
Ferrari are more than welcome to enter another team under the same rules any other new team can enter. There are regulations that mean certain things must differ between two teams, the red bull cars are quite different if you look at their technical approach.
Michael
20th September 2009, 9:07
i think that we need new teams in F1 ;)
YouTube will be in F1
so, where is Facebook, Google or other world websites?
dsob
20th September 2009, 9:35
Just to – again – set the record straight, YouTube will not be in Formula 1. The man who started YouTube some years ago and then sold it to Google, that man, that individual, has invested some of his own money in the new U.S. Formula 1 team.
Johann
20th September 2009, 9:12
I think 3 car teams will be very interesting. However, the points system will have to be adapted in order to make it feasible for the smaller teams to also score a point once in a while. If the field will be expanded by 50%, the number of point scoring positions will also have to be expanded by 50% (i.e. points are scored up to 12th place). In fact, with the four new teams in F1 I think this should be done anyways.
Bigbadderboom
20th September 2009, 9:28
All i can see is problems arising from this solution.
Ferrari wont allow 2 cars to race on track so can you imagine 3?
Team orders would mean ridiculous strategies being implemented across the grid with cars playing defensive roles.
More than 30 cars would be ludicousley dangerous, especially first laps
And as MP4 has already said, this will not cut costs, it will escalate them. More transport costs (And will Bernie pay for the extra cars) More support, more engineers, more tyres for Bridgestone, more race support costs, more driver salaries. Frankly its stupid, if he wants Schumi driving again Luca is gonna have to upset someone to give him a seat.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 9:43
Exactly! We all know how Mr Veto’s team mates were used to shield him. Just ask Eddie or Rubens. I wouldn’t be surprised if ferrari ask the same thing from alonso-kimi-massa whoever those two unfortunate drivers are.
It would be like the AIR FORCE ONE, wherein Schumi is escorted by two ferrari’s on either sides, for him to crawl to some more worthless wins. Ferrari, just to ensure that schumi wins, will make sure that the DECOY ferrari’s are equipped with missiles to shoot off the mclarens, the brawns & the red bulls just in case they are overtaking schumi or even lapping him. If this is the case, I think kimi-massa-alonso whoever needs some training in fighter aircrafts ;)
Baz
20th September 2009, 12:28
This, of course, goes against the spirit of F1, which after the Renault scandal is under the microscope. More importantly, this also flies in the face of F1 trying to keep costs down; missiles aren’t cheap. :-)
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 12:45
But missiles are free!! Cuz Schumacher had stuck a deal with Osama bin laden during his debut season, osama sponsored schumacker! . There is a veto in the agreement that Osama must supply free missiles to schumacher whenever he asks for it. ;)
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 12:47
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/Chaparral2E/schumacher911.jpg
slr
20th September 2009, 9:38
A new rule shouldn’t be implemented just so that one team would benefit. I hope Jean Todt doesn’t become FIA president, if he does then it might happen.
Steph90
20th September 2009, 9:46
IDR Alfa should come back!
I voted no, partly because of the smaller teams and also because although a Ferrari fan I do not want Schuey back and this whole proposal has been brought foward by Ferrari for him to return. They’d still have too many drivers anyway, unless the whole track was just made up of red cars.
Icarus
20th September 2009, 10:10
No to the three teams idea, it would make following F1 much less consistent. They would have to dump the constructors title all together cause there would be no way to make it fair.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 10:15
This 3rd car can be used in testing instead of the races.Just think about it. This 3rd car will be doing:-
Friday practice:-
session 1= 25-30 laps
session 2= 25-30 laps
Saturday practice:-
session 1 = at least 15 laps
Saturday Quali:-
Total at least = 25 laps
sunday race= 55-60 laps (avg)
Ok, we know that most of the tilke circuits & most others are around 5 kms in distance, so the total distance(avg) covered by this 3rd car during the entire season would be
[total laps during a week(150-160)]*[lap distance( usually 5kms)]*[ 18 races ] = around 13,500 Kms
Tell me how this running of this 3rd car is going to cut costs??
Would it not be prudent to utilize this 3rd car for testing?
I fail to understand how the dimwit Luca di monty missed this?
Not only will this ensure testing mileage & aid in developing the car, but also will help young drivers wanting to get a drive.
At the end of the day we live in a real world, no matter what you simulate using softwares & stuff you’ll never know where you are. I’m all in favor of using this 3rd car for IN SEASON TESTING
Derek
20th September 2009, 10:32
I was thinking along the lines of a 3rd car for 3 to 4 races per year, team’s decide which races. This would give drivers experience. But now I agree the 3rd car should be used in the practice sessions only ie. p1, p2 and p3 again this would give the 3rd driver experience of the car and tracks so he would be ready for promotion at short notice. Additionally it would provide in-season testing of upgrades for the team.
dsob
20th September 2009, 10:20
Totally against three cars per team. Contrary to what many think, it does not hasten development or improve efficiency thereof, and it certainly is not more economical. Never was, never will be.
it feels like a ‘quick-fix’ solution to the threat of dwindling
The quick-fix, Keith, is to dwindling grid size–it has no effect on team numbers. In fact, it would reduce the number of teams needed for a proper sized grid, which would suck from a competition standpoint. I agree, though, that in the long run it causes more problems than it was ever worth.
As has been mentioned, with 11 to 14 teams taking the grid next season, we have sufficient numbers. And if the numbers drop, then FiA needs to provide more incentive for new teams to apply, instead of awarding slots only to former business associates of Max Mosley.
LOL, too true. No idea why Luca is riding this particular painted pony so hard. Perhaps he does just want a blocker for the other two cars, who knows? Many seem to think it would be for Schumacher, despite the fact that Michael has said repeatedly he has no desire to return to a full-time seat.But it doesn’t seem anyone else is interested in a third car, so I’m not going to even think about it.
No, this situation shows the need to bring back in-season ongoing testing. A FULL-TIME test driver would be familiar and comfortable with the cars in race trim, so no safety issues, and far better performance on track than any of the replacement drivers this year have shown. (Though I must admit Liuzzi wasn’t bad at all at Monza, before his mechanical failure.)
Maksutov
20th September 2009, 13:12
I agree, three cars per team is just ludicrous idea at the moment. Perhaps one day when everyone finally realizes that cost capping is not actually going to work, and the new teams start to fall out again, then maybe bring 3 cars.
He just has too much money and doesn’t know what to do with it..
Nik
20th September 2009, 10:33
No. If FOTA had had their breakaway with 8 teams, fair enough. Since you can’t give some teams three cars and not others, and 39 cars would be ridiculous, it’s a silly idea.
One thing though: why do people keep saying that this is all so Ferrari can bring back Schumacher? Isn’t it more obvious that they just want a Massa-Alonso-Raikkonen team and they’re using the magic name of Schumacher to push this through?
If they really want more of the top drivers in the best teams, then standardise the cars more (particularly the aero, which should also be minimised and compensated by limited ground effects) so it won’t be a problem, instead of muscling the smaller teams out of the way.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:40
Because that’s why Montezemolo says he wants it. But you’re right, they have got more drivers than they’ve got room for. And the idea that Schumacher would be fit enough to drive next year is not a foregone conclusion.
Prisoner Monkeys
20th September 2009, 10:43
I think it can be workable … if it’s handled right. I’m seriously against the idea of one team being able to lock the podium out, so here’s my suggestiong: allow third cars, but only to rookie drivers.
The idea is simple: depending on how many teams take to the idea, the FIA opens up two or four extra places on the grid. All teams are guaranteed their two regular cars on the grid, while the third cars have a qualifying race on Saturday mornings with the two fastest drivers winning the right to particpate in qualifying proper and the race. It should be pretty manageable, since most modern venues would have the capacity to hole all the teams and cars. The only exception would be Monaco, where no additional cars are run.
In terms of numbering – and to make it easier to identify them – we just continue the old third-driver numbering systen. If Brawn win the championship and fourteen teams arrive in Bahrain, then Button and Barrichello will be number one and number two, while their third driver will be number thirty. Sebastian Vettel and Mark Webber will be three and four for Red Bull, and their third driver will be thirty-one. All the way through to Sauber, who would have twenty-eight, twenty-nine and forty-three. An alternative solution is to stagger the numbers slightly as they do in the WRC for different classes, with a deliberate gap between the last of the regular drivers and the first of the new.
The reason I’m suggesting this is because Ferrari were really caught with their pants down when Massa had his accident. They didn’t really have anyone to turn to – especially after Schumacher was unable to return – and so had to choose between Badoer and Gene. They don’t really have a young driver development program the way Red Bull do. And even that is proving too successful for its own good, with more drivers than there are availble racing seats. You’ve got Brendon Hartley, Mikhail Aleshin, Daniel Ricciardo, Robert Wickens and probably half a dozen more, and that’s just in the Red Bull program. There’s plenty of drivers in Formula Two and GP2 who are worth a shot at Formula one – Petrov, di Grassi, Maldonado, etc. – who are stuck in the lower categories.
So, having a third car available to rookie drivers could be a way forward. And to give them all a chance, they could be employed on a limited basis and unable to score constructor points (but they can get driver points). Say there’s twenty rouns in 2010 – the provisional calendar has eighteen, but South Korea wants in, and there’s a couple of others like Argentina and America waiting in the wings – they could then be employed on a five-race basis. If they’re successful, they can continue; if not, the team could offer the place to someone else if they’re disappointing. And to give them a fair shot, teams could only employ a certain number of rookie drivers over the season.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 10:59
Are you sure? What an inauspicious venue to begin the season!!
Kovy
20th September 2009, 13:13
Starts in Bahrain, ends in Abu Dhabai :(
Forget 3 car teams, F1 needs to get its track situation sorted.
18 races per season, and over the next couple of seasons we’ve got 3 new tilkedromes (Korea, Russia, India) in countries with zero F1 heritage coming in.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 13:22
If i were Donnie Rumsfeld, I would have ordered the American Air Force to bomb these 2 circuits during the war with Iraq!!! Hate that Bahrain track to the core!
BTW is it North or South Korea that’s hosting that race?
manatcna
20th September 2009, 23:16
Nice one :)
Prisoner Monkeys
21st September 2009, 1:42
The teams have a major test in Bahrain twoweeks before the beginning of the season. In order to cut down on costs, they can leave all non-essential equipment at the venue and come back to it two weeks later.
I fail to see what your problem is. You say they hve no Formula One heritage, but shouldn’t they be allowed the opportunity todevelop it?
Everyone whinges about how Formula One is moving away from Europe, but it’s not. Every contry that has consistently been a part of its championship is represented. Brtiain: Silverstone, moving to Donington. Belgium: still at Spa. Germany: alternating between Hockenheim and the Nurburgring. Spain: Barcelona and Valencia might not be much, but they’re there. Italy: Monza. Monaco: will always be a part of the championship. France and ortugal are the only ones not represented on that list, but Algarve want to join the championship, as does Flins-les-Mureax. So every major Western European nation is still on the calendar, or attempting to be there. Formula One isn’t leaving Europe, it’s a case of the championship expanding to the point where the same number of European races takes place, but they form less than half of the calendar. The only races that are really missing from the championship are Argentina and America, but there is talk of a return to South America and Formula One doesn’t need the USA.
So you can complain about it all you want … but the way I see it, you’ve got nothing.
But this is for the discussion of teams running third cars, not the state of the calendar.
Now who’s being unreasonable? you haven’t even seen a race at Abu Dhabi yet!
Also, it’s the South that are holding the race. Do you really think the North would be able to get an event? The costs of running a race would be so high that the people would have to eat leaves so that the government could pay for it. And the sad thing is that some of the people are already forced to do that.
Martin
20th September 2009, 18:03
Amen
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:42
Seems Patrick Head agrees with you: http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=46918
Prisoner Monkeys
21st September 2009, 0:18
I didn’t even know about that article.
My reasoning was simple: Ferrari want a third car to run Schmacher, Massa and Raikkonen or Alonso. Either combination arguably has three of the best drivers in the sport. So my question is this: what happens if we have another season like 2004? Having all three Ferraris consistently on the podium would be a very bad thing, I think. It’d make the sport even more boring than it was in 2000-2004.
Patrickl
20th September 2009, 10:56
I’m shocked that there are so many votes supporting the 3 car teams idea.
Did you seriously think things through? Or is it just a whim of the moment vote that you would like to see three Ferrari’s with one possibly having Schumacher behind the wheel?
As presented by just about everyone in F1 (besides Domenicali and Montezemolo), having 3 car teams is a bad idea.
Martin
20th September 2009, 18:12
I could care less if schumacher comes back or not. I want to see the sport leave these boring circuits in out of the way places that have no ties to racing or the motor industrie. I want in season testing brought back and multiple drivers involved. I want the sport to go back to what worked and stay away from these new ideas that have only made bernie richer and everyone else worse off. If you want a 3 car team then that is fine with the understanding that only the top 2 will race. That will breed some competition within the team and you can believe if 1 driver is getting preferences over the others he will be vetted out in a hurry and the team will have to explain to the public as to why they are handicapping 1 driver and giving others a advantage.
Most of all I want the sport to return to its roots and go back to the days when the drivers treated each other with courtesy and honor..something that has been missing in the last 5 yrs or so.
If getting back there means a few individuals in the sport are told to leave and not come back, I am ok with that. I believe the sport will be the richer for it.
Patrickl
20th September 2009, 19:17
The poll is specifically about Montezemolo’s proposal of letting teams RACE 3 cars.
What’s the point of making up al kinds of alternate interpretations of what the poll could be about? It ruins the results of the poll.
Martin
21st September 2009, 4:21
I understood exactly what the poll meant. I was just adding some condition for the conversation. If we have 14 teams next year and they all had 3 cars in the race, some of the tracks would get a little crowded I think. If the top2 of the 3 car team race then it is back to the original number.
Whats the point of you getting worked up about this. The results of the poll are what they are and people vote for 1 of 3 posibilities, maybe you should go back and look at the question and chill out.
Patrickl
21st September 2009, 8:05
Chill out? I’m mereley saying that people should answer the poll because otherwise it’s useless to have a poll to begin with.
You’re the one ranting on and on about how F1 sucks these days. Chill out indeed.
lynnduffy
20th September 2009, 11:45
Yes but only on the basis that each team can run three cars in qualy, but only two cars go through to the race. IMHO one of the most interesting things in F1 is to see drivers compete in the same machinery. This applies particularly to qualifying, where the vagaries of the race don’t come into it, and it’s all about who can hook up the fastest lap.
@Patrickl – wow that’s a bit patronising. Just because people have a different opinion than yours, they must not have thought it though?
Patrickl
20th September 2009, 15:19
Well another suggestion is indeed that people (like you) don’t read the poll properly and just post something they made up themselves.
James G
21st September 2009, 0:09
In what way is Lynn’s post not related to the topic?
The poll is about whether people think three car teams are a good idea.
Lynn’s post is about her opinion on three car teams.
Perhaps it is you who needs to read the posts properly.
Rod
20th September 2009, 11:47
3 car teams should only be allowed if all teams are to run 3 cars – and, let’s face it, in these days of cost cutting that’s unlikely to be a viable option.
F1Yankee
20th September 2009, 11:53
in a typical season, we’d have ferrari and mclaren locking up the front 3 rows instaed of just 2. no thanks.
Marcus
20th September 2009, 12:03
By the power of Murray Walker give me 3 Ferrari’s plzzzzz.
More cars + more overtaking + more crashes = more entertainment………..and more booze and women.
But………..more slowpokes on the track getting in the way or crashing into the decent drivers = one Angry Alonso
sumedh
20th September 2009, 12:06
3 cars would be fun!!
more drivers would be in top teams.
I feel it make sense in terms of the cost cutting exercise. The costs of building and running a 3rd car are lower since the development costs are going to be lesser. Plus, additional advertising space, additional entertainment for fans, more cars, more drivers, more publicity for Formula 1 (good publicity) – the Rate of Return on the 3rd car investment is much much higher than the 1st or 2nd car :-)
Also, I feel that Ferrari want the 3rd car for Fernando Alonso and not Michael Schumacher.
GP1
20th September 2009, 14:26
that’s right, they don’t know is Felipe able to drive but they have promised one seat to him. And it’s quite possible that Ferrari has contract with Kimi and Alonso. They don’t want to take risk Kimi to go.. so if they can race by three cars then anyway they will have two quality drives. Schu knows that his days are gone – he won’t return
Martin
20th September 2009, 18:27
In watching the massa/kimi results and the way they drive..I would take massa over kimi anytime. I like kimi, but I think massa is a better driver. I think ferrari has seen this also and wants to keep massa, plus they are pretty loyal to their drivers.
The 1 driver I would not have regardlesss of his stats and abilities is alonso, he is too much like senna.
I personally rate the top drivers in the sport as (in no particular order) Hamilton, massa,kimi,vettel,alonso,reubens,button,and rosberg. There are other drivers that might belong to the group but only 1 or 2 more. the rest are just taking up seats. There are a few new guys in the feeder series that seem to be good also but I will reserve until I see them in a proper f1 car. As for the replacement driver for renault, not real impressed so far.
GP1
20th September 2009, 19:20
I would take Massa if there would be only qualifying, he is good there but Kimi is better racer..that’s part of Ferraris problem. Anyway I think that it’s not question of sport. Luca has done some stupid decicion and tries to find solution ,and third car is one choice
Martin
21st September 2009, 4:25
Massa has oout performed kimi the last 2 yrs up until he took a suspension piece to the head. He also did well the yr kimi won the wdc in support for kimi.
Kind of ironic that a piece of a suspension gave massa a mandatory suspension.
jambmoz
20th September 2009, 12:15
i think 3 car teams could work, wouldnt it be better to have more of the best drivers in cars that can win. after all the bad press f1 has had lately a good news story like schumi coming back would be used to sweep that all away
rob
20th September 2009, 12:16
The smaller teams would just need to up their game.
Lustigson
20th September 2009, 12:18
I don’t see the need for this discussion, actually, and I’m bafffled by why Montezemolo and Domenicali keep bringing it up.
(a) We don’t need three-car teams, since 13 teams (26 cars) are entered for 2010, with another team (28 cars) on the bench. Even if as many as 3 teams don’t make it, we’re 4 cars up from this year.
(b) Should entries at any time fall below 8 teams (16 cars), there a clause in the Concorde Agreement that states that the FIA can order some or all teams to run third cars.
UnicornF1
20th September 2009, 12:19
3rd car should be optional (like KERS :-P)
If a team uses 3 cars in a race then the awarded points should be the 2/3 of the total.
So for example if a 3-car team has all the cars on the podium the awarded points would be (10+8+6)*2/3=16
However, I think the drivers should get all of the points and not a 2/3 (or other) fraction…
UnicornF1
20th September 2009, 12:20
…or if all three drivers are in the first 8 position, only the top two to get the whole points and the third one to stay pointless!
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 12:52
I’m sorry UnicornF1. Your whole argument is pointless! F1 as it is a very complicated sport, dimwits like ME hardly understand it. Why complicate it further?
Martin
21st September 2009, 4:28
sarcasm….i like it…nice try but your not that dumb.
UnicornF1
20th September 2009, 12:24
…so the 3rd driver will give points only to the team.
In my previous example,
the driver in the 1st position would be awarded 10 points,
the driver in the 2nd position would be awarded 8 points and
the driver in the 3rd position would be awarded 0 points.
The 6 points of the 3rd position would roll to the driver of the fourth position and so on…
There is some complexity, but I think something like this could be done!
Cesar
20th September 2009, 12:57
I havent read the other replies, but I think a 3rd car have to be allowed only if the driver is a rookie. That way new drivers will have the possibility to join F1.
Maksutov
20th September 2009, 13:17
who needs rookies lets bring Mansell and Lauda back in!!
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 13:34
Why not Sir Stirling Moss? Poor guy is often dubbed “the greatest driver never to win the World Championship” :( He’s not too old, just turned 81 on 17th :) . Surely he deserves WDC more than anyone.
Maksutov
20th September 2009, 15:17
oh yeah him too :), he’s got plenty years left
Jonesracing82
20th September 2009, 13:15
NO! imagine seasons ’02 and ’04 with 3 Ferrari’s each year? enuff said
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:44
Yeah that’s my worry too.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 13:15
i’m very surprised that no one else has come up with some ridiculous idea which matches the one proposed by Luca Di Monty. Ok, Lemme be the first to make a ridiculous proposal. Why not run a single car team? By doing so, one need not worry about crashing on purpose to help teammate,no contractual issues, no veto clauses, no fear of getting beaten by teammate, higher pay, most importantly No team orders. This proposal will definitely cut costs. Dunno why no one at FIA proposed this idea yet. I was under the impression that people who run this sport are far more intelligent, sadly I’m wrong.
Maksutov
20th September 2009, 13:20
That’s a good idea :)
Tiomkin
20th September 2009, 20:25
Great idea!! Solves all problems. That’s the first sensible thing you’ve said in a long while.
Steph90
20th September 2009, 13:22
lynnduffy has swayed my mind abit…
That is true and would be great to see (Alonso, Massa, Kimi is my little dream) but I still worry for costs for smaller teams.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 13:58
Alonso would cry like a prat if he were to get the same equipment as Kimi & Massa.
Skova265
20th September 2009, 18:14
looks like kimi signes back to mclaren
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090920103457.shtml
Treesurfingredsquirrel
20th September 2009, 13:29
Formula 1 should not go to 3 car teams. The main issues of today, are quite serious in that the future of our planet is in great jeopardy.
Formula 1 is trying to become greener, and is taking on board and becoming a catalyst for green revolution in vehicle propulsion.
I am very sympathetic towards green issues, but also like F1 and racing, and I think their should still be a place for racing, even when oil-based-fuelled cars could be phased out as our means of getting around.
Auto racing is damaging to the environment, for various reasons, including the logistics of moving it from venue to venue, which has quite an impact on the environment. Expanding teams to 3 cars increases this, but so does keeping it as 2 car teams but increasing the number of teams. For the sake of the environment, their needs to be limits that reflect the serious concerns for how much we’re trashing our world.
I don’t doubt many of you are unbelievably still Global warming sceptics, and are wondering what place green issues have in your debate, and their are also those who think global warming and other environmental crises are real but now beyond repair. But lets try really hard to keep trying to turn things around, even if its too late, our intention and duty must remain the same, to respect our only home, we may not have long left … even our means of producing food the ways we currently do are going to be over, in only 5 to 10 years, because they all depend on the oil to fuel agriculture.
No to 3 cars and No to a field of teams much bigger than it already is.
mp4-19b
20th September 2009, 13:45
I’m certainly not one of them. My ultimate wish is to see F1 cars being run on electricity or even better solar power. But you point the rise in global temp to automobile exhausts, CO etc. But some “Experts” in this field including Prof Michio Kaku attribute this to the increased solar activity(sunspots) & he mentions that rise in global temp has nothing to do with pollution, but it has more to do with the sun itself.
But as long as we have “PSEUDO” Green activists like Max Mosley, god help us!
Martin
21st September 2009, 4:31
maybe if we make f1 greener then BMW can come back and be conpetitive…not
verstappen
20th September 2009, 20:07
Racing and green are (except in the case of jaguar) natural enemies.
And by the way: Soccer is a far worse sport, because there are more matches which attract more public, driving in automobiles to the stadiums. So maybe you should focus on soccer…
manatcna
20th September 2009, 23:24
This is a Formula One blog/site
Ciaran
20th September 2009, 13:43
Bad idea in my opinion. If one team is dominating, the entire podium could be locked out, which would just be plain boring.
Having said that, I quite liked the old rule of letting smaller teams run a third car in Friday practice.
Martin
21st September 2009, 4:34
Let them have 3 car teams but only the top 2 can race. If they qualify 1,2,3 then the third qualifier is out.
That will stir up interteam competition and make everyone hungry to do well.
Carlos in Oz
20th September 2009, 14:03
I dont think there should be 3 car teams but a team like Ferrari could do something similar to what Red Bull have done with Toro Rosso & back a 2nd team. Maybe that’s happening with ex-BMW? They’re rumoured to be running Ferrari engines, (Sauber already had a history with Ferrari) the investors are rumoured to be middle eastern & european. Start a new rumour, Schumi’s old middle eastern backers (from Abu Dhabi where a tower was built in his name) are putting up the cash, Schumi’s running the team and we’ll have Alonso/Massa/Kimi & Fisi as the 4 drivers for the Scuderia! Perhaps alonso/massa at ferrari, kimi/fisi at say…Team MASERATI… You heard it here first folks… :)
Anonymous
20th September 2009, 14:33
Comments here are good.
Here’s my input allow the 3rd car just for testing and evaluation of upgrade only but not for race. They can run this car on Friday only or yet stand-in spare car. Just my F1 fantasy.
Austin
20th September 2009, 16:14
Heres another idea, to involve the test drivers and give them racing experience in a F1 car. Why not have a test drivers championship, like the reserve games in football. It would allow team bosses to see who has what it takes to race in the championship proper. Maybe run it before the main race.
Martin
21st September 2009, 4:35
not bad..I like
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:45
Good to hear! Keep ’em coming…
Willian Ceolin
20th September 2009, 14:58
Which will be next step?
Offer four, five cars? I think it is a bad solution to F1.
In this way we’ll have a new Nascar instead of F1.
Sam
20th September 2009, 16:04
If Ferrari want more driver seats why not run a 2nd team like Red Bull?
Austin
20th September 2009, 16:07
I voted no. I am surprised there are so many Yes votes. I suspect these Yes votes are Ferrai fans and people who like crashes. The more cars/bad drivers on the track the bigger the chance of crashes and injuries or death. The only reason Ferrari want a 3rd car is to block other cars and basically fix the race in their favour. I can’t see this 3rd car idea happening then again if Todt wins then Montezemolo and the Yes voters might get their wish, with the race fixing scandal, this can only encourage more cheating which we don’t want. If this does happen then the podium should be four places and the points increased for the lower scorers to make it possible for consistent scorers with a chance of catching the leaders. At least make it fair as this 3rd car can only benefit the better teams in their favour and probably put the smaller teams out of business. Anyway this is a non starter imo.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:47
OK, maybe that’s statistically true, but I think it’s a slightly perverse way of looking at it. The same argument says we should never increase the number of cars in F1, in fact we should decrease it to zero and then go play ping-pong.
Bigbadderboom
21st September 2009, 7:17
It,s not just statistically true because of the number of cars on track Keith, it’s also true because of the defensive role that the 3rd car will undoubtedly be given once the season gets under way. I think what has become apparent this year is that there is a fine line between a good F1 driver and a dangerously slow one. 3 car teams would be likely to employ a Rookie driver to help succesion within their team, and that combined with the sheer number of cars would definatley result in more incidents.
Net Sticks
20th September 2009, 16:22
3 Cars? 4 Cars…
I heard Ferrari wanted a fourth car for Nikki Lauda, but he refuse. He said that he makes more money being a commentator… lol
And now back to real life – I’ve just read a news report, saying The Mirror is coming forward with the existence of a pre-agreement (like Alonso-Ferrari) between Kimi and McLaren, for next season and only if Ferrari keeps on paying him whatever they agree until his contract ends.
This means too good thinks – If Ferrari really wants Alonso (puah!) they will have to pay their 2 drivers and one of his bigger rival teams… and the other good thing is that Kimi comes home and McLaren will have the best drivers in business – and it won’t be like when Alonso was there – Kimi is more peaceful and doesn’t demand to have the all team only fixated on him, like that poor Spaniard did and still does… How can he get out untouched by everything that’s been happening at Renault it’s a mystery to me, maybe he is already under Ferrari/FIA protection…. it’s the only scenery I can believe.
Welcome back to a real team Kimi! Good for you, good for us!
Andrés Menacho
20th September 2009, 16:33
3 cars is no a solution, what F1 needs is motivation to get more car manufacturers into the sport. A signing bonus of some sort and a more relevant link to road car development. BMW leaving and the possibility of Renault and Toyota quiting simply signals that the sport is becoming irrelevant to the manufacturers.
Damon
20th September 2009, 16:40
Agreed.
I just can’t imagine 3 Ferraris or McLarens taking the first 3 places in qualifying and then leading together the race from lap one – obviously not racing one another. It’d be aweful for the sport.
the Sri lankan
20th September 2009, 23:12
yeap, the points system wil need to be adjusted, the garages at every track need to be mad bigger and just imagine the fact not every driver available is going to be experienced. i see pure carnage in this f1 fantasy
David
20th September 2009, 17:08
Third cars should be allowed but they shouldn’t be allowed to score points
Wesley
20th September 2009, 17:33
I would love to see Schumi come back……and get beaten by Hamilton,Kimi,Fernando,Vettel and most of all Rubens.But,not in a third Ferrari.Three car teams will only cause more confusion,cost more money, and cause even more politics with drivers.
Rob R.
20th September 2009, 18:06
It appeals to me at first glance for two reasons. Because it would make it easier for Schumi to make a comeback (I wasn’t his biggest fan… but obviously it would be a good thing). And also, because Max is against it – that makes me even more inclined to agree with it.
However, having considered people’s arguments I think it should only happen as an emergency measure, if by the time Melbourne rolls around, it becomes apparent that half of the new teams are not going to make it, in addition to BMW and Toyota and/or Renault dropping out.
Red Andy
20th September 2009, 18:07
I don’t understand why Ferrari are so keen on having 3 cars all of a sudden. They had 4 in 2007 and all they did then was complain.
Prisoner Monkeys
21st September 2009, 6:06
Because they want to put Michael Schumacher back behind the wheel.
Tarry
20th September 2009, 18:53
I think the poll question mixes two issues into one. Shouldn’t the question be broken down into the two issues to get a real answer. Would you like to see larger grid? Do you want three car teams on the grid?
jambmoz
20th September 2009, 21:44
the kimi to maclaren story has one serious snag, theres no way ferrari will keep paying him to drive for a rival team. they cant be that desparate to get alonso, i dont think hes even as good as kimi.
manatcna
20th September 2009, 23:30
How about allowing three cars per team, but having only two cars (per team) racing?
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th September 2009, 23:49
Wouldn’t that just increase costs for no benefit?
Zam
20th September 2009, 23:54
If three cars f1 can be passed this mean that Michael Schumacher can join f1 again.
classjazz
21st September 2009, 8:11
Definitely NO to 3 car teams. We were recently told that the cost of financing F1 teams was prohibitive and now they suddenly want to forget that argument and increase the numbers of cars. Whoever it is promulgating that argument is very mistaken in his beliefs. It will discourage the smaller teams and the modern F1 circuits cannot cope with more traffic.
If you want to improve the quality get rid of circuits that are mere tunnels with no roofs (ie Singapore) and the street circuits. I would make an exception for Monaaco on the grounds of tradition. Was it Gonzales who finished up in the harbour? It was getting too crowded even then.
Open road circuits are thrilling to watch with the current calibre of drivers and unless the current Safety Car rules are changed then we are never going to get past the first corner with 3 car teams.
Discuss.
CJD
21st September 2009, 12:09
It was the great Alberto Ascari who sadly died a few days later testing a Ferrari sports car
classjazz
21st September 2009, 13:48
Thank you CJD. I don’t have access to my references at the moment but I remember the incident
CJD
21st September 2009, 14:05
You’re welcome classjazz
PJA
21st September 2009, 9:21
Although I would like larger grids, The only circumstances I would support three-car teams is if several teams left F1 and the alternate was a grid smaller than we have at the moment.
I would rather any extra grid slots be filled up by new teams even if they have virtually no chance of winning a race than have a third Ferrari or McLaren.
If Ferrari want to bring Schumacher back that bad they will just have to drop one of their current drivers.
If in Football a club bought the two best goalkeepers in the world they would still only be able to play one of them in goal, and if a F1 team sign more than two race drivers no matter how good they all are they will only be able to let two race at each Grand Prix.
K
21st September 2009, 11:00
So for the past two years, F1 has been trying to cut costs to allow smaller teams a chance to compete against the top dogs. And now we are talking about 3 car teams. So if there are 13 teams (33 cars) or 14 teams (42 cars).
For starters, that is FAR to many cars on a grid, especially when the cars are SO weak (compared to lets say touring cars), you could expect to lose 5-7 cars on the first 3 corners of the first lap. The tracks are not big enough to support that number of cars and the garages are not big enough either.
Then we have driver wages, why would smaller teams who struggle each year to stay in F1 want to pay a third drivers wages? It makes no sence. The costs of running a thrid car would just be too great and with F1 trying to lower costs, the last thing they want is 13,14 MORE cars on the grid.
I cant see this ever happening and i dont want to see it happen either, 26 cars is plenty for F1, 28 at a push but thats about the limit.
Martin
21st September 2009, 13:25
Controlling cost..come on guys, do you really think yhat the fia is really going to be able to enforce this rule..I dont. They have never been able to stay ahead of the teams. If the big teams want to blow their budgets, they are going to and they will hide this from any of the investigators.
If the teams want 3 cars let them have it but only the fastest 2 race then it is back to the original number.
HounslowBusGarage
21st September 2009, 11:25
2,240 votes on this poll. I’m impressed. How does that total compare to other polls, Keith?
CJD
21st September 2009, 12:06
Money should be spent on young driver training in test sessions before 3rd cars are allowed. Granted that F1 is currently a small step above F2 it has still been a step too far for some who prospered in F2
pSynrg
21st September 2009, 13:04
At my time of voting I am genuinely surprised that 56% were against the idea.
Surely the question “More F1?” is a resounding yes in every respect, especially here!
ashes1991
21st September 2009, 15:33
Its a good way of cutting cost’s in F1 isn’t it?
And y would it be for Michael Schumacher, didn’t he completely rule a return out last month?
Ferrari really need to stop involving Schumacher in everything its getting boring now, I for one am glad he left and could not make a comeback.
F1 has just got rid of two cheats whats the point in bring one back!!!!
gpcampbell
21st September 2009, 23:57
Not a massive fan of this, as it would pretty much make a “two tier championship”. IE this year when the red bulls and brawns were the only ones really competiting for the top slot it would be 6 cars.
Also team orders would come into play a lot more, I think there would be less “racing” involved. Also young drivers might be picked basically to hault the field.
Im not in favour unless they critically reduce the air disturbance of the cars (or stop Tillman designed god-awful tracks).
SonicJunkie
22nd September 2009, 14:19
I think the teams should be permitted to run three cars, but the third car should get no points — at least, in the Constructors’ Championship. I mean, if we see the all-Ferrari podium, they don’t get 10+8+6, but still 10+8.