F1 is letting too many rules get in the way

In the aftermath of the Malaysian Grand Prix, and ahead of this weekend’s Chinese Grand Prix, the biggest talking points have been all about team orders — obeying them Nico Rosberg style and disobeying them Sebastian Vettel style.

What this drawn out saga has done is merely conceal the real problem (or perhaps joke) of the 2013 season, namely the tyre options on offer for the 22 drivers and 11 teams.

Pirelli cannot be faulted for their commitment to the sport, their wish to adhere to the desires and even whims of the Formula 1 world. From the outset of their return to the sport, in 2011 as the sole tyre supplier, their mandate was set by the powers that be: Spice up the show!

Credit to them and their motorsport boss Paul Hembery, they adhered with some pretty interesting offerings in the first couple of years, although the rot had already begun to creep in. Here was a tyre manufacturer being asked to make tyres that do not last too long. Wearing my consumer hat the alarm bells started to ring.

Fast forward to the 2013 season and the Italian tyre giant, apparently under pressure from higher up, spiced up their compounds even more. How long the tyres last these days are a matter of pure speculation. Guess work is rife in the most sophisticated motor sport series in the world.

Some drivers can make the rubber last longer, others cannot; some cars are kinder to the tyres than others. Tyre strategy, once a science, is now a lottery.

Go too fast, then the wear may accelerate until the tyres ‘fall off the cliff’ — yes a technical term, used in F1 these days quite regularly to describe the point when tyres are working well to the point when suddenly they are not working at all. An abrupt loss of adhesion and performance, a pretty scary concept even if you are one of the elite racing drivers in the world.

Imagine being your average driver commuting to work or delivering your children to school and your Pirelli tyres ‘fall off a cliff’. As a consumer I do not want to know that my tyres fall off anything, let alone a cliff. This begs the question: how is this F1 exposure benefitting Pirelli?

Tyres that wear too fast, rubber that performs then stops, drivers complaining about wear and lack of grip. As a communications professional I fail to see the value of such a reputation Pirelli is getting by being involved with F1 in this capacity and under these terms.

The powers that be seem to be commanding the manufacturer to degrade their high-quality products — and Pirelli do produce highly regarded tyres for all levels of cars, but are particularly famous for their performance road tyres. Is the F1 adventure tarnishing their hitherto impeccable reputation?

Testing ground

It is important to delve into the ethos of F1 and recall that it is the form of motor racing representing the very pinnacle of the sport, dating back over a century and becoming official with the modern world championship concept in 1950. It has an illustrious history, packed with intrigue, drama, legends, legacies and the like. Over the years a testing ground for manufacturers, where the motto ‘racing improves the breed’ thrived.

However, over the years it has been dumbed down for the ‘benefit’ of the show. Technological prowess is secondary now to the entertainment factor.

Granted F1 racing at the moment is of the highest order. Close contests, non-stop action and pretty unpredictable so something is being done right as the fan base grows every year and with huge amounts of column inches devoted to reporting on just about every aspect of the sport.

However, something is amiss in my book. Paint all 22 cars white and you would have trouble distinguishing one from the other, as the rules are so tight that being innovative and creative inevitably leads to the same common technical solutions and thus very similar looking cars. Throw in the following rule: All components of the engine and gearbox, including clutch, differential and KERS in addition to all associated actuators must be controlled by an Electronic Control Unit (ECU) which has been manufactured by an FIA designated supplier and to a specification determined by the FIA.

Add to that the Pirelli control tyres, and the performance enhancing goodies such as KERS and DRS. Limit expenditure through budget restrictions, then do the most absurd thing: ban testing. Suddenly you have a highly controlled, one-make formula. Alarmingly if you look at modern F1 it is pretty much that.

A series for identical cars, sorry to say, is not what F1 is about. There is a place for one-make series, but F1 being the pinnacle is about pushing boundaries of inventiveness, innovation, creativity and ingenuity to produce the best race cars for the best race drivers in the world.

The solution is simple: open it all up. Allow tyre manufacturers to compete. Do away with the controls and restrictions. Allow testing. Unshackle the cheque book. In other words set F1 free.

I rest my case quoting the words of the acknowledged F1 design genius of the current era, Adrian Newey: “We should be careful that the [F1] rules don’t restrict the inventive spirit. The beauty of F1 is the struggle of man against man but also machine against machine. There is something for every interest.

“The more stringent the rules are, the faster we move towards GP1 [in reference to the GP2 one-make series]. Do we want that?”

The writer is the corporate communications manager at Dubai Autodrome llc.