[MuZo2]

If Haryanto & Celis can why not Maldonado, he is GP2 winner and has F1 win.

 

[oqvist]

Maldonado surely can no doubt about that but seem to have problem with the focus sadly. It´s not lack of talent that get him into trouble

 

[Hutnicks]

  If Haryanto & Celis can why not Maldonado, he is GP2 winner and has F1 win.

See Bull Durham and the million dollar arm with the two dollar head quote. No one will employ him as pay drivers are no longer needed except perhaps by manure and maybe even Sauber in the near future. The win was a fluke, everyone on earth knows that.  If he had a snowballs chance he would have a testing contract currently.

 

[Melrose]

 
See Bull Durham and the million dollar arm with the two dollar head quote. No one will employ him as pay drivers are no longer needed except perhaps by manure and maybe even Sauber in the near future. The win was a fluke, everyone on earth knows that.  If he had a snowballs chance he would have a testing contract currently.

.that and the man is just a maniac behind the wheel...

 

[Hutnicks]

In other news and on the eve of Montreal, which may well prove to be the pivotal race of the season. I'm going with Ric for the win
 
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-no-longer-a-fair-competition-sauber-744537/
 
Love to hear some opinions on this.  I am of several minds on this whole issue. Probably medication for that other than the blended red I favour
 
All kidding aside. Monisha's whining is starting to have a very familiar tone to it for this old dog of an F1 fan (who obstinately refuses to either abandon the sport or expire watching it) I recall a certain Mr. Ken Tyrell peeing and moaning in the turbo car era MKI ( back when turbocars blew out 1500 hp in qually form and detonated engines in spectacular manners) that he could not secure a competitive engine as he was so meagerly funded. That same man had no such problems when ELF petroleum was dishing out dollars by the bucket load to his team and made knights out of his drivers and secured his personal fortune for life. The result of that mess was a two tier formula which came as close to fragmenting F1 in the way Indycar went as it possibly could. Thankfully meaner heads prevailed and brutal management got through the crises.
 
 So now we are seeing the same scenario played out in a more politically savvy and financially dependent era. Does Monisha have a point? Sure she does, but the distribution of money in a sport who's evolution harkens back to paid for winning be it driver or team may fall well short. The powers that be have made a decision to grant Ferrari outrageous amounts of money just to participate, sure. Then again that very marque brings fans to the seats, so there is a valuation in and of itself in having them participate. What I personally do not agree with is the amount of sway they have in rulesmaking. I think that over the bribe//payout is more offensive in the long run.
 
 I want Sauber to survive, I really do. I thought that the Kubica era for them could have been pivotal, but it fizzled when BMW ran for their lives. Now, I really am beginning to think that a team should be treated no better, no worse than the drivers. Your winning you are golden, you are not winning, you had best have one eye focused on the next race and the other focused on the chap behind you looking to fill your slot.
 
 The hubris here is that Sauber by virtue of their tenure in the sport has developed an attitude of entitlement. The reality is that teams come and go, some of them with much greater achievements in the sport than Sauber ever had (Lotus anyone?). Somewhere along the line the idea of earning the right to compete has been completely lost here.
 
 While I do think the revenue distribution is awfully skewed. I have to ask myself, "If I were in charge of the payouts, would I want to give money to Monisha?" 
 
  In the latest and completely missable F1 film Lauda: The Untold Story. Coulthard and Stewart both define F1 today as the pinnacle of Risk Management.  Looking through that lens and seeing finance as a risk scenario lends a new light on the whole payout schema.

 

[oqvist]

you are forgetting McLaren... They are bribed like crazy only beaten by Ferrari and they are not winning. McLaren is the real manure team of F1 all the bribe money and no results. Could even afford going without a main sponsor for half a year because they got money anyway even if they end up dead last  ..
 
System is just wrong there is no way to defend it. Base it entirely on performance and scrap the awful bribing system that some old teams managed to secure for themselves. If they can´t compete without legacy money because they can´t win they have no place in F1.

 

[MuZo2]

You get money , you make the rules , how can a new or team on small budget survive? At the moment there is not too much sponsors putting money. Driver sponsor payments also dont come on time. So what next for Sauber, FI become B-teams and keep running at back or in mid field?

 

[Hutnicks]

I am dead against any team being paid just for showing up. It bridges the gap between a competitive sport vs entertainment a little to well.  Perhaps instead of the "trust fund" with the resultant trust fund babies, re instituting a per race payout that mirrors the points system would be a better scenario.
 
 
HAAS is doing it but arguably they are not small budget. Lets face it the technology has run so far now that a small budget sport this is not.  The garagista days are forever gone and you really need the backing of a big manu to be competitive nowadays..F1 is NOT a feeder system, it is the pinnacle. There is a certain obligation on the teams entering it to be prepared.

 

[Melrose]

  you are forgetting McLaren... They are bribed like crazy only beaten by Ferrari and they are not winning. McLaren is the real manure team of F1 all the bribe money and no results. Could even afford going without a main sponsor for half a year because they got money anyway even if they end up dead last  ..
 
System is just wrong there is no way to defend it. Base it entirely on performance and scrap the awful bribing system that some old teams managed to secure for themselves. If they can´t compete without legacy money because they can´t win they have no place in F1.

...man you must really hate McLaren. To a degree, things are based on performance - teams make more if they finish higher. They make less if they finish lower.
 
Let's be fair by the current "type" of standards: Ferrari gets 5% just for being Ferrari. In that case, McLaren should be entitled to a hefty payment for bringing a lot of technology to the table that's now taken for granted (carbon fiber, for instance, that has a huge impact on competitiveness, development, AND safety). They don't whine about it.
 
But the bottom line is that Ferrari is the only team that's universally given freebies simply based on who they are. They're the only ones. I don't like it either, but rather than gnash my teeth I simply gloat quietly when they lose.
 
I don't like it, but don't mind it awfully, that teams with a longer history get paid more. What I absolutely detest is when they start making exceptions to those rules just to please some random team who's decided to paint their cars red. You want to apply silly exceptions to all teams, it's much better. McLaren gets a chunk for their carbon fiber (when other constructors poo-pood the idea of it), Sauber, sure, make an exception for Sauber: They were previously owned by BMW F1, and BMW's have a propeller logo - and we all know that propellers spin in a circle just like the tires on the race car that Ferrari makes.... my point is the whole idea of Let's Make Rules, No Wait Let's Break The Rules For Ferrari is hugely unfair and horrendously stupid and if you're going to point fingers and complain, make it a logical issue. No offense. McLaren is perhaps the most invested, inventive, and most dedicated team in the history of F1.
 
What separates real F1 teams from upstart F1 teams is that ,especially Williams and McLaren, race because it's in their genes. Ferrari, Mercedes, all the teams that have come and gone as mere marketing testbeds, are in it for the money. Dietrich threw his toys around and wanted to go home simply because he wasn't winning. Mercedes has come right out and said they're in it as a marketing investment to improve the brand status of their road cars. Ferrari has threatened to leave altogether if they don't get money...these aren't teams interested in heritage or racing, why pay them a premium? But that's how it is. I don't like Williams, but at least they're in it for the right reason and they don't sit and cry when things don't go their way. Like Ferrari.
 
/rant. I just had coffee.

 

[oqvist]

No I don´t hate mclaren it´s just the system doesn´t make sense other then to enrich a select few that has been around for a while! McLaren just sticks out because they does such a bad job with all their money so it´s hard to feel they are in anyway entitled to them compared to teams that does a much better job but is almost bankrupt while performing better on less resources! McLaren is just about as much about the money as any other team in F1? I think that is one of the reason they got into problem focusing to much on their road cars.
 
If the system is wrong and unfair you change it you don´t stick to it because it happen to suit yourself. Oh wait...

 

[xkonfuzed]

Less than 0.3 seconds between the top three qualifiers in Canada. Haven't seen that in quite a while. 
 
Here's to hoping the Merc boys both crash out so we can have a good race. 

 

[Hutnicks]

  Less than 0.3 seconds between the top three qualifiers in Canada. Haven't seen that in quite a while. 
 
Here's to hoping the Merc boys both crash out so we can have a good race. 

Hoping for the rain myself.

 

[xkonfuzed]

 
Hoping for the rain myself.

Rain would indeed make for a spectacular race. Lets hope for another 2011 

.

 

[Melrose]

....if it means Jenson can make another spectacular win like that, hell yes.
 
But...

 

[xkonfuzed]

What is it with teams screwing up their tyre strategies and gifting their wins to Mercs?