From: mpconmy@gmail.com   
      
   Edmund  wrote:   
   > On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:   
   >>   
   >> Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across the   
   >> field.   
   >   
   > Potential you say, right!   
   > For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different   
   > manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the   
   > others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.   
   > I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages and   
   > disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then others   
   > and visa versa.   
   > F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by   
   > technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.   
   > As we speak some road cars are in certain area’s way more advanced then F1.   
      
   This comes up every few years and it's simple: what kind of F1 do you   
   want?   
      
   F1 has always been about both the drivers and the constructors. Drivers   
   (to a large extent) have an upper limit. In any generation - certainly   
   recently - the difference between the best and the worst is relatively   
   small (particularly the best few) and it's things like consistency and   
   mental preparedness that often distinguishes the good from the great.   
   That's all pretty tight margins.   
      
   The other part has been the cars where I'd made two arguments.   
      
   1. An unregulated, non-formula competition would allow unconstrained   
   development which could move much faster than development of drivers.   
   Not only would I argue that weakening the regulations would move it more   
   towards being a constructors' competition, I would go so far as to say   
   it would rendered the WDC irrelevent. And that's fine if what you want   
   is a pure technology competition. Some would like that (you seem to)   
   others would hate it.   
      
   2. Any move in that direction would decisively shift (even further) the   
   advantage to the bigger, better-funded teams. Again, you could argue   
   "what's the problem with that" but that (just as with the other   
   regulations) has been fought against with things like cost caps and   
   penalties on excessive engine and gearbox changes.   
      
   We could go around this argument for the millionth time, but the outcome   
   is always the same: Removal of restrictions (or the formula itself)   
   completely changes the competition and is likely to (even more) lead to   
   processions.   
      
   And the fans have been clear (over the decades I've watched) they don't   
   like the same car and/or driver* constantly winning. They want (but   
   rarely get) close competition. What you're arguing is completely out of   
   step with that.   
      
   * Every dominant driver - from Schumacher through Prost, Senna,   
     Schumacher, Vettel, Hamilton and most recently Verstappen - split the   
     fans, particularly when there are contiguous runs. If the car is   
     significantly better than the field (which in your scenario it   
     could/would be), you could well get a dominant driver...but as they   
     only need to beat their teammate you could have an inferior driver   
     (compared to the other teams' drivers) winning year after year. As was   
     alleged with most of the drivers above...but is rarely "just" the car.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)