Formula 1 CEO Stefano Domenicali wants to make it harder for the series’ top teams to achieve long periods of dominance.
However he ruled out making any mid-season change to the regulations in order to close up the competition following Red Bull’s dominant start to 2023.The reigning champions have won all seven grands prix held so far, often with a margin in excess of 20 seconds over their rivals. However Domenicali told the official F1 website it would not be fair to change the rules in response to their dominance.
“It’s not correct because we cannot be seen as a sport of manipulation,” said Domenicali. “This is not correct and this is not fair. I’m not envisioning at all this kind of approach.”
F1 hoped new rules it introduced in recent seasons, including the budget cap, aerodynamic testing restrictions (ATR) and revised technical regulations, would create closer competition. But since the middle of 2022 all bar one of the last 18 races have been won by Red Bull.
During that time Red Bull were penalised for exceeding the budget cap in 2021. However Domenicali insists the team’s success should be respected.
“The gap is between one team and the others. While the others are very, very close, one team – and that is Red Bull – did an incredible job. This is a job of meritocracy so we need to consider that they did an incredible job.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
“It is true that the gap seems to be big but we need to be prudent because we know in life things can change very quickly.”
“It’s clear that the aim of what we want to do is to make sure that this gap will stay as small as possible. I’m sure that the other teams are watching how they can catch up with their development in the context of the budget cap.
“It would be interesting to see if the development curve of the team that today is leading will slow down because at the end of the day they did a better job in the shorter term. So that would be very interesting to see in the next couple of months.”
Domenicali believes leaving the rules unchanged is the “right approach” to encourage teams to converge in performance, creating closer competition. “The rules have been changed not many years ago and therefore this will happen for sure,” he said.
The next major change in F1’s regulations is just three years away. Domenicali said the series’ goal is to make it harder for one team to dominate for extended periods of time after new rules are introduced.
“F1 has been always a sport where there has been cycles where teams were very dominant and then some others came in into the equation. So I would say our objective should be, if you take the strategic approach, to make sure that these cycles in the future will be shorter, because that means that 20 cars, or whatever they are, will be really in the competition. This is what I would say as a commercial rights holder, but also as a lover of the sport, I would like to see.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2023 F1 season
- FIA president cleared of alleged interference in two 2023 races
- First week viewing figures for new Drive to Survive season fall again
- Max who? Drive to Survive season six prefers its favourite faces
- RaceFans’ complete 2023 season review
- The F1 drivers who pulled off the 10 biggest charges through the field in 2023
Boomerang
14th June 2023, 9:51
I’ve heard this story many times in the past 40+ years. Some people never learn that there is no limit to human creativity. Everything done is just matter of time and money. We have very restrictive technical regulations and the cost cap is introduced. Despite all of that we see that one team dominates with every right. What’s next? Let’s ban F1 altogether.
Jose Silva
14th June 2023, 20:25
Basically, this.
From 1950-84, only Ferrari, Fangio, Cooper and Brabham won back to back Drivers championships.
From 1985 onwards, that has basically been the norm. Ask @keith how many championships have been won back to back by the same team since 1985.
Or let me add:
1984-86
1988-91
1992-93
1994-95
1996-97
1998-99
2000-04
2005-06
2010-13
2014-20
2021-22
Proesterchen (@proesterchen)
14th June 2023, 9:52
How about encouraging the 9 bad to awful engineering teams to do better, rather than punishing the one engineering team that got it right?
They are being paid to participate, after all.
slowmo (@slowmo)
14th June 2023, 11:28
How do they do that exactly given all of those 9 teams that made a mess of their development are now trapped on a lower development trajectory and can’t spend more than Red Bull to catch up now so they’re stuck there.
MichaelN
14th June 2023, 12:00
@slowmo
They can start by providing an incentive to do better.
That means turning back the changes to commercial rights revenue payouts that makes simply “being” in F1 a profitable venture.
S
14th June 2023, 11:44
By reversing the payment structure in F1, for example? Give the lowest performing teams the most money. That would certainly provide a lot more ‘encouragement’ wouldn’t it….
They need more than just moral support.
If nothing else, it would discourage F1’s eternal success feedback loop.
Illusive (@illusive)
16th June 2023, 8:52
Now why would a team making more money by being mediocre, put the effort to be number 1 and get less money. Its like people just dont understand basic economics baffles me.
S
16th June 2023, 16:08
Maybe they’d like to actually win races and championships, rather than just count their prize money?
If not, it shows everyone exactly why they are in F1, doesn’t it…
Matteo (@m-bagattini)
14th June 2023, 13:25
> bad to awful engineering teams
This is a terrible take and a complete lack of respect towards thousands of hard working people
Proesterchen (@proesterchen)
14th June 2023, 13:41
Respect is earned.
Respect is earned not by hard work, but by good results.
What are the current statistics? 17 wins out of 18 races in the last 11 months going to Red Bull Racing, with the only remaining victory going to an engineering team that was busy wilfully ignoring months’ worth of data telling them they were in a cul-de-sac.
Matteo (@m-bagattini)
14th June 2023, 14:56
> Respect is earned not by hard work, but by good results.
I thought your previous one was a terrible take but man @proesterchen you’re a master in this art.
Proesterchen (@proesterchen)
14th June 2023, 17:37
If you can jot down a race-winning design in 2 hours, I don’t care what you do the rest of the week.
“Hard work” is the refuge for the failed. I don’t care how hard someone worked on something, I care about the results of their work.
SteveP
14th June 2023, 19:12
Well I, and I presume everyone here, respect Adrian Newey for his knowledge and achievements in the field of aero engineering.
However, if the intention was to make the F1 playing field more level then setting up regulations that play to the strengths of an engineer with previous experience of the main element – ground effect – simply isn’t going to level anything.
AN deserves respect, the FIA deserve every critical comment that comes.
N
14th June 2023, 14:12
“This is a terrible take and a complete lack of respect towards thousands of hard working people”
Not to mention the fact that the team out front cheated on their way there.
NM
14th June 2023, 14:46
ah yes that 400.000 wins you a second a lap
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
14th June 2023, 21:00
Yes, it’s a joke how this 400k budget cap breach is being talked up. If I worked and got 805 euro a month I’d have a quiet life, but with 800 a month I’m starving! That’s the % we’re talking about and that’s what it looks like.
MichaelN
14th June 2023, 19:05
They’re hard working, sure. On what, though?
Mercedes last won a race late last season.
Ferrari last won a race almost a year ago.
McLaren last won a race in 2021 – before that, their previous race win dates from 2012.
Alpine last won a race in 2021 – their only one.
Red Bull Jr. last won a race in 2020 – before that, their only other race win dates from 2008.
Williams last won a race in 2012 – before that, their previous date win dates from 2004.
Sauber has never won a race. (Although other owners of said factory have; once.)
Aston Martin has never won a race. (Although other owners of said factory have; once.)
Haas has never won a race.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
14th June 2023, 21:05
Agree, and alpine is renault in the end of the day, so their previous win would have to go back to 2010 or thereabouts, back when alonso still raced there, don’t recall any more recent ones.
Tommy C (@tommy-c)
15th June 2023, 0:39
Raikkonen 2013 Australia, 2012 Abu Dhabi as Lotus and Alonso 2008 Japan as Renault. Aston Martin by extension won races as Jordan in the 90s.
drmouse (@drmouse)
14th June 2023, 16:28
Doesn’t that rather devalue the efforts of Red Bull? Your comment reads that it’s the other teams who did a terrible job, not Red Bull who did a good job.
Personally, I think it’s the other way around. Mercedes dropped the ball and continued down a dead-end path, true, and Ferrari have not been on good form, but many of the other teams have done a really good job since the new regs came in.
RBR, on the other hand, have done an amazing job, and obviously found areas of aero performance which the other teams can barely dream of. This is unsurprising, really: Newey is a genius, and any heavily-aero-dominant period will strongly favour the team he is with. However, it’s a fantastic achievement to produce a car which is likely still well over half a second ahead of any other car in the field, and it’s really belittling to say it’s all because the other teams have done a terrible job.
Proesterchen (@proesterchen)
14th June 2023, 17:50
I don’t know where I’d be belittling Red Bull Racing.
They clearly have the best solution to the current set of regulations, and as you mention by quite a margin.
That doesn’t absolve the 9 other design teams from their collective failure, though.
Alan Dove
14th June 2023, 9:52
Closer competition in the fashion people seem to campaign for, I predict, will yield declining viewership and interest. If it’s based on technical interference it will do two things
1. Dramatically reduce technical coverage. This is a huge driver for interest in F1. A cursory look at youtube and various channels it makes up the majority of detailed analysis. The current regs are very restrictive, but even the layman can see why a RedBull is faster than a Williams by looking at the floors.
2. People like narratives. David vs Goliath. If F1 becomes an ‘anyone can win’ then it borderline becomes random and people will switch off. There needs to be a natural ebb and flow where some teams get it right, some teams get it wrong. Risk is what creates tension and stakes. Remove risk from F1 and you create a bland product. Just look at Merc. They took a risk, got it wrong, but it has driven a large amount of fan engagement and debate. (which is a good thing)
A lot of people will learn this too late.
S
14th June 2023, 11:52
Closer competition has been the biggest driver of growth in viewership. Most people simply don’t care what makes it happen.
And the results of that analysis are that technical articles are watched far, far less than on-track competitive action.
And if a ‘layman’ can see why Red Bull’s car is faster just by looking at the floor, then why can’t Williams and the other 8 teams figure it out? Do you really believe that aerodynamics is about how something looks? I thought that line of thinking was very thoroughly disproved about 70 years ago.
Just because something looks faster or more complex doesn’t make it so.
The best thing about Mercedes ‘getting it wrong’ was that it prevented them from continuing to dominate. It returned on-track competition to F1 – even if only for one season.
That really IS a good thing.
You talk about learning, but you didn’t learn much from last week’s conversation where you said essentially the same thing and were thoroughly proven wrong by multiple people.
Very few of F1’s viewers actually care much about the technical aspects of what is increasingly becoming a spec series.
Alan Dove
15th June 2023, 11:42
You can’t dissociate F1’s technical factors from its commercial success and the success of drivers. I wasn’t proven wrong at all. The technical aspect of F1 is probably the prime driver of content generation and it also aids in creation of superstars that transcend the sport (and act as huge commercial drivers). ALmost all podcasts, news etc… on F1 fundamentally is technical based. Inter-team battles are even technical based as often the conversation is about whose style works best witht he car’s dynamics.
Sport, to be a success, needs clear narratives. Spec competition doesn’t create clear narratives. It needs Davids and Goliaths. IndyCar generates about a 10th of the content F1 does.
Another simple example is when Bianchi got a point in the Marussia at Monaco. In spec competition that story would have generated almost zero coverage as it wouldn’t have been exceptional. Yet, because Marussia had a rubbish car it generated huge interest because he got a point. As someone who has worked in motorsport media and seen the market there (karting) largely go spec (as its participant based), the professional side of the sport and media has all but collapsed. There are no real stories any more. Nothing to write about. I know first hand what a decline in technical development does to the professional side of a sport. It’s devastating.
S
15th June 2023, 14:28
How do you figure that? You know they hold events called “races” right? They account for a fair chunk of F1’s ‘media content’…..
Where are you getting your media from and why aren’t you looking somewhere else? Don’t you even care that this is a racing series?
Without the racing, these cars are nothing but show cars doing a couple dozen parades every year. Sadly, that’s all they produce most of the time.
No it doesn’t, and yes it does. There are at least as many ‘stories’ and ‘narratives’ in any and every spec series as there are in F1. You just don’t look for them or read them when they are provided to you, I expect – largely because you clearly favour F1 over everything else that it compares to.
What most spec series provide that F1 doesn’t, however, is something that needs no further explanation whatsoever: plain old good, exciting, competitive on-track competition. Those pictures tell their own story.
I suggest your opinion is massively biased by your location. Indycar is huge in the Americas – F1 is traditionally not nearly as popular. The growth F1 has seen recently is not about ‘narratives’ or technical aspects, it is about harder and more competitive on-track racing and the dramatisation of what goes on behind the scenes (Netflix). That’s hardly a truthful account of events, though. Just the way certain American media and consumers like it
There are plenty of examples of lesser-known drivers and lower-budget teams achieving unlikely good results in other (including spec) series that were huge stories at the time. Clearly you aren’t paying attention or simply don’t care.
Yes, I’m not surprised at your statement about working in motorsports media. Biased and sensationalist as usual when it comes to your favourite series. About as neutral and open-minded as Domenicali…
Even in karting, when a special talent comes along, they get talked about within their little karting universe. And everyone who knows about them knows it isn’t a technical advantage that is bringing those results – because they all have the same equipment available.
The main reason nobody cares about karting anymore is because it is the bottom of the motorsports food chain. It commands the least media time because it has so little to offer a large audience. As great as the drivers and teams may be, they are still only racing go karts. Low budget stuff that a lot of people can do, and inevitably most professional drivers did when they were kids. Back when they were nobody.
Worth considering that most junior and senior series are spec for one extremely important and deliberate reason. Nobody cares how well you drive the best car – they only care how you, as an athlete, compare to others in the same circumstances. Nobody is interested in Tiger Woods’ golf clubs or Usain Bolt’s shoes, even though they are made especially for them… If those things made a noticeable performance difference, then they’d also be judged on their technical advantage that other competitors don’t enjoy the luxury of.
The ‘sport’ (the human part) is indeed far more important than the technical aspect. It always will be, or it isn’t a sport. It is a just car show.
Hey, you’d think that will all that technical diversity that Goodwood would be the ultimate test – but unsurprisingly, nobody really sees it as a meaningful competition, do they. It’s a car show.
MichaelN
14th June 2023, 12:04
They just notice the Red Bull looks more complex and then conclude that explains it being better. And that’s fine; they’re not aerodynamic experts. Earlier this year even the likes of Hamilton and Russell were described as questioning the Mercedes merely because it ‘looked different’.
Back in the early 2000s the opposite was regarded as common sense: a good design needed very little wings, flaps, pylons, gurney flaps etc. It was instead the bad teams that used those to fix their flawed core concepts.
Optimaximal (@optimaximal)
14th June 2023, 12:29
The most exciting seasons of the last decade or so have been the ones where half the teams on the grid had a chance to win. Look at 2012 – by the halfway point of the season, we had 7-8 different winners, including true wildcards and nobody knew how the entire season was going to pan out.
Alan Dove
15th June 2023, 11:47
I can’t remember the 2012 season. I don’t remember who won what to be honest other than Vettel won the season.
F1’s growth in value in recent years has happened during one of the most dominant periods in its history. 2021 was great, but there was only ever two cars in with a shout of winning
MotoGP’s grew during Rossi’s dominant era. Though he was an expert because his domination was filled with narratives. He was a genius at that. I am not saying consistent win every race domination is good all the time. But domination as a thing isn’t necessarily bad. It drives intrigue, how many articles are written on the RB19. In what other motorsoirt does a simple qualifying crash and crane lift generate SO MUCH content?
What happens if a team catches up? Can they catch up? It jsut this constant drive of content, of interest.
I think if F1 veers towards forcing equality watch the bubble pop. You have to be very careful with these kind of things.
S
15th June 2023, 14:41
You seem to equate an amount of content with the amount of consumption.
The internet, and indeed the world, is chock full of content – but most of it is largely unknown and unwanted.
F1’s media is no different. Of all the content, the bulk of the consumption remains with the actual on-track product.
Surely you’ve noticed on this site that technical articles get a fraction on the engagement when compared with the racing.
Pinak Ghosh (@pinakghosh)
14th June 2023, 11:03
I am confused after reading the contradictory comments from Stefano. On one hand he is saying there cannot be any interference as it can be seen as manipulation. On the other hand he is saying that “we” want to make sure that the gap will stay as small as possible. How can “we” which is Formula 1 reduce the gap without intervention? If convergence is the answer, then, there is no “we”, the teams have to buckle up and deliver in a cost cap era that “we” have introduced.
Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
14th June 2023, 11:51
Lol. Hasn’t he seen the number of red flags in the last 10 laps of races recently??
MichaelN
14th June 2023, 12:05
Note he’s saying they cannot be seen as such, not that he disagrees with the concept.
Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
14th June 2023, 19:02
Haha, fair point
Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
14th June 2023, 19:03
Yes, the answer is yes
DB-C90 (@dbradock)
14th June 2023, 12:01
I said at the start of the cost cap that if one team got it right it would take several seasons for the rest to catch up because teams (or the bigger ones) can no longer throw $$ at the problem at the rate they used to if they found they were way off the pace.
What was surprising was that so many teams made such a shocking attempt in the second season. I’m pretty sure most people, including myself, thought that after a year of “learning”, some of the other teams would’ve managed to tighten the gap at the front.
Having a budget cap was always going to work like this – teams really get one shot only to get their base car right. If they don’t, then their season is essentially finished until they can try again in the next.
However, give it time, and things will close up. They always do.
Please please Liberty and FIA don’t start changing things out of panic. Team performances always converge in a period of stable rules after a few seasons. The turbo-hybrid era was an outlier because the PU manufacturers (I’m looking at you Renault) couldn’t be bothered (or couldn’t) improving their PU performance and pretty much gifted Mercedes the advantage for years.
But I’ll bet now that they’ll bring out a new set of rules just when things get close and we’ll get another rinse and repeat.
drmouse (@drmouse)
14th June 2023, 16:35
Precisely. We’re in a similar situation to that provided by the token system at the start of the hybrid era, except that all development is restricted, not just engines. It’s unlikely we’ll see anyone catch RBR regularly for a few seasons.
Clay (@clayt)
14th June 2023, 17:06
And then, just when it starts to get good, the formula changes and the cycle begins again.
Witan
14th June 2023, 12:49
Unintended consequences await as they fiddle with the regulations. The last change was to make completion better and look at how that turned out.
Mayrton
14th June 2023, 13:29
Not sure where to start with this…
So, 8 years of Mercedes was ok, but in the 2nd year of RB this is suddenly a topic. While we all know a regulatory overhaul has always led to this effect. Pretty naive I would say for someone in charge.
But they already did. Like in 2021 come Silverstone there will be other tires. Back then they favoured the Mercs otherwise 2021 would have been over after Silverstone. Let’s see what it does this season.
That is a lie. A big one. They do nothing but manipulate. It’s part of F1 and yes very frustrating. 2021 was the epiphany.
Aha, so he does know how the game works. Pity that he subsequently does not understand that they shouldn’t:
That is the most stupid thing to do as there will never be time for convergence. Unless you change the regulations every year or every two years: that will get you different champions but the teams won’t appreciate the investments needed.
Still very unimpressed by this man, ever since he took office.
slowmo (@slowmo)
14th June 2023, 15:45
In fairness the rules were changed to harm Mercedes most through their dominant years and the same happened in the dominant Ferrari and previous Red Bull years. It’s not like the FIA interference is suddenly some new concept for the sport.
I happen to agree that they should do nothing with the rules though now unless they find teams are using unintended loop holes to improve performance which the flexible floors last year were absolutely completely against the intent of the regulations. We have the budget cap in place now so just let the teams converge although I personally would be in favour of removing the engine development freeze as I don’t think it’s needed anymore now that Honda have remained in the sport.
drmouse (@drmouse)
14th June 2023, 16:51
Very much agree, though it won’t be. It’s been suggested and dismissed already due to new engine regs coming in soon.
I’m still mildly suspicious that Honda may never have really intended to leave, that it was all a ploy to make F1 completely aero-dominant again and give RBR an advantage. But that horse has bolted and we are where we are until 2026.
S
14th June 2023, 15:47
The teams spend the exact same amount of money ever year, regardless of whether the rules change or not.
If they aren’t making new cars, they are improving old ones – spending the same amount of time and money in doing so.
drmouse (@drmouse)
14th June 2023, 16:46
It was a massive topic of conversation from all sides throughout those 8 years, including from high-ranking officials in the FIA and FOM. If you didn’t hear it, you weren’t listening.
Agreed, when the race director chose to change the result of the championship in the closing laps of the race by ignoring the rules he’d specifically stated he had no choice but to follow, that was very frustrating :P
All else aside, while 2021 was a very exciting season, it was also a low point for F1 in many ways. Consistency, rule interpretation, penalties, official interference…. All were significantly worse than I’ve ever seen in F1 before. My interest in F1 has taken a massive dip since.
Maybe it’s shown us that we need interference from the officials to make F1 exciting as things stand…
Mayrton
15th June 2023, 6:49
We differ in opinion on 2021. I do not think it was exciting at all. On the contrary. It was an insult to the viewers intelligence, since highly scripted and an utter farce of a season. So, no please no interference from officials. If one can’t stand racing being boring from time to time then one should look for a different show. This is sports. Football is hardly exciting either most of the time, so I do not get this need for excitement in the fist place. Sounds again like the show is the objective rather than the mechanics and drivers performance sportive wise.
drmouse (@drmouse)
15th June 2023, 7:40
Tbh I agree, I’ve never really needed F1 to be exciting all the time, is much prefer it to be a sporting competition than a show. 2021 was the lowest point I’ve seen in F1 in terms of sporting fairness, which is why my interest has significantly lessened.
I’m sure we would disagree on which parts were the worst, but it’s nice to agree with you for a change 🙂
Mayrton
15th June 2023, 15:28
:-)
MichaelN
14th June 2023, 19:13
Don’t agree with that; if you ignore 2009 – which was ‘influenced’ by then FIA-president Mosley backing the double diffuser because it would hamper Ferrari and McLaren that had dared oppose him as the driving forces being FOTA the regulations were actually pretty good (even if the rear wings looked bad). The 2010 season saw no fewer than three teams fight for the title, same in 2012 with Hamilton, Vettel and Alonso all in the running throughout most of the season (Hamilton falling away towards the end). Had Pirelli not made a mockery of 2013 that might also have been good; after the English GP with all the failing Pirelli’s, Vettel (Red Bull) led the championship with 132 points from Alonso (Ferrari) with 111 and Räikkönen (Lotus) with 98 and Hamilton (McLaren) not too far being with 89.
Before that, the big 2005 overhaul also saw one oddball season with the weird tyre regulations (but it was still competitive between Alonso and Räikkönen). Then 2006 had a good Ferrari vs. Renault battle, 2007 had McLaren vs. Ferrari, 2008 had McLaren vs. Ferrari vs. an outside challenge from BMW.
Robert Henning
14th June 2023, 19:18
Yeah Stefano, thanks to the clownshow last year at Canada, we lost any semblance of Competition that killed the Ferrari concept.
RBR have won 24 out of the last 29 races with 20 of them going to Verstappen.
Nealio
15th June 2023, 13:56
Domenicali wants to dictate the entertainment that is Formula 1. He seems to see himself as its curator and the hero of the financial investors in the business. That F1 is called a circus has never been more true. A shame that it’s so obscenely expensive as as any twenty racers can offer as much entertainment at a dirt track in Ohio on an evening.