the only thing i can think of is that massa was his team mate in williams at some point, and a suspension spring smashed massa in the face when he was with ferrari
"We're just developing this F1 style engine for our road program, then for other reasons we're not using it on the road, so we've stuck it in the back of our F1 car". This year Red Bull have given Adrian Newey his own personal supercomputer for his home, and if he happens to spend every waking moment running CFD, who are we to stop it?
Yes all of that is possible, just like Spy Gate is possible, but there is a reason why it just does not happen every day. Sporting integrity IS a thing with most people, and penalties for inevitably uncovered truth, could be severe.
It would be nice to see the cost cap be followed up with some relaxation of the technical regulations to allow for more innovation. Mercedes had the money to develop DAS or their blown wheel hubs, above and beyond what most teams budgets could have ever allowed. Same with Red Bull developing their blown diffuser. Small teams never had the spare capital to try and figure out how to copy those designs and make them as good. Meanwhile, a small team would find some great idea copied swiftly and then be out developed. Tighter budgets and restricting development hours means that teams will be able to pull themselves up the grid by developing an idea with skill and knowledge, and it'll take time for last year's champions to develop their version of your great idea.
Can't teams just hide salaries as end of year bonuses? Like Mercedes saying "If we finished higher than ninth in the Constructors Championship in 2021 (which they will) your Bonus will make your minimum wage Job with pay you deserve.
Of course they will do that. Red Bull for example always has worked with bonuses and after they became champions in 2012 the entire 657 staff members got 12 350 EUR bonus.
@@DizMizzer ye but that is a legitimate bonus. What the other guy meant is basically underpaying staff but with bonus clauses that will with 99.999% certainty be met.
I would like to think that F1 realize that could be a work around and that in the finer legalese details for these bedget caps stuff like that is still considered a breach of the rules. Something like reasonable scale, like 6th getting a 1500 bonus each to first getting a 12000 dollar like the Red Bull one mentioned below, would still be accepted but it's not like the board deciding on the rules to present are complete apes, they aren't going to just let Mercedes or Ferrari pay everyone the lowest possible wage and then bonus it all up to what it was for finishing at least 5 races.
Drivers are already exempt. They said your three highest paid employees. That might not actually include drivers but only because they are all exempted. If they exempted the top three so teams could compete for them. P Well drivers obviously falls in that same category. H,,
12:15 They might've gone over 100% for when/if more teams join the grid, because in this case the top team will still have 75%, no matter the amount of teams. If they would benchmark the lowest classified team as 100% and 2 more teams join in, the top team would lose another 2/15th of their otherwise allocated aero development time.
Three years ago I saw a video on your channel for the first time, it is incredible how much you have improved the animation. Congratulations, you always produce very high quality content.
With such a cost cap it won't be about who can spend the most but about who has the best lawyers and accountants who can bring the most money oitside of the cost cap. For example I can imagine that staff salaries will become minimum wage and it will be filled up with bonusses or that the brand Mercedes or Redbull does a lot of windtunnel testing and development of parts as a "hobby" and that the data will be given for free to the F1 teams. It will be a game of who can get away with the best loopholes to escape the cost cap.
All in favour of a cost cap but I'm a bit 50/50 on development caps, just feels a bit off capping development in the "pinnacle of motorsport". I guess it depends if you want truly the best cars that teams can make or competitive racing, maybe they'll balance both but it'll be interesting to see🤔
One thing that I'd like to see, instead of a cost CAP, make it a cost threshold, any team that goes over it must give 2x the amount to the lowest cost team, so that won't stop them from spending, but if they do, the money would also go to someone who needs more money to spend.
I like the cost cap as it addresses some of F1's issues without turning it into a spec series, but the development cap sucks. They should be narrowing the gap by putting everyone on an even playing field instead of prescribing handicaps. With less R&D time the top teams will be more likely to stick with what already works, as they won't have the time to risk on testing something new, and it will end up stifling innovation
@John Dongle Like you, I hate the b.o.p development cap. I hate the new age thinking that everyone deserves to win. My kids aren't allowed to win, even though they're faster because it not fair to the slower children. What kinda backwards devolution mentality is that. People watch sport because it's the closest thing to war and the physical manifestation of competition. I don't want to watch a sport questioning whether the winner won because he's better or because the other guy is forced to wear lead shoes/gloves etc. The budget cap is a great idea, but other stuff is pure cow manure.
A very informative video except that you have to first watch an ad from youtube at the start and then watch another ad for a minute from the sponsors and watch one more ad in between the video
I like the idea of spending caps to make F1 more competitive, but if it reduces the developments that we see coming out of F1 (which it will) then I think it invalidates a major reason why F1 is important to several of the large manufacturers.
I mean, maybe Im not F1's primary type of audience, but am I the only one who wants to see the best machine possible no matter what? Honestly I care more about the machines than the drivers, which is why I dont particularly care if the racing action is a bit dull. Even if every race has the same winner, to me its a way of saying, "yep, under those conditions also, this machine (and driver of course) is still best." And I suppose if the racing action is what you want then doing whatever you can to level the field is best I guess, but for me, I will always be more attracted to humans pushing technology to its limit than making sure someone new wins each week.
The nice thing about the aero rule as a system to hamper winning teams is that: 1 - it does make it harder for a team like Merc to get the aero on the car perfect, hopefully opening up the comp to smaller teams. 2 - They can theoretically still pull off a radical, ingenious idea, like F-ducts, or reduce time required in the wind tunnel with exceptional engineering. And that type of development is really about having the right people and winning through skill/brilliance, rather than just a stack of $$$.
12:15 Why they didn't put 100% at slowest team? Maybe it's for adding new teams. That way if the number of teams changes, it's easier to adjust and make clear what is and isn't allowed.
this was a really good video dude. Love your stuff. Always makes me happy to see one. Also, I love watching your editing improve little by little every video, like the wind tunnel stuff in this one. Great job as always mate.
the cost cap the main issue i see is how difficult it will be to police im not sure i like the wind tunnel time reduction though, maybe with a period of stable rules it might produce the desired effect, but whenever there is a rule change that is going to give teams who did worse last year a big advantage rather than levelling the playing field something that the recent talk of customer cars made me think of which i feel like could be a better solution would be if at some point during the season (towards the end), all teams made the designs/details of that years car public, that could include wind tunnel data etc etc. there is already some copying of ideas but teams try to hide stuff. this to me seems a better way of having every team start each new season on a level footing.
F1 actually is in very bad situation now, and not because of Coronavirus. Formula E for example has a way more competitive teams and far more exciting races and so gained a huge popularity already. Lets be honest, majority of people like me doesnt care about all that engineering and just wants to see exciting racing. And its proven fact looking at tendency of fan base growth. Cost cap is the only future for F1 because if they dont do something about 3 teams winning everything and everyonr else toileting at the back, they could be well out of business by 2040
@@bosshard64 i dont really agree with that overall, i havent always liked the end result but i have enjoyed some of the racing recently, and i think at least some of the "problem" is rose tinted glasses the comparison with formula e does raise some points though, i believe in formula e all the cars are prescribed, which can result in closer on track racing, it does take away some of the innovation though which is an area that has always been a big factor in f1 as for predictions that companies will be out of business in x years, ive been hearing that about different companies for as long as i can remember and so far most of them have been followed by most companies posting their best ever financial year, while i think covid might have stopped that happening to f1 this year those predictions always seems to just be someone who is bitter about something,
@@custard131 i dunno fe already has over two millions followers tho it lasted just 6 years! Many people switch to fe now although some f1 races were exciting, when fe has over 10 potential winners every race i dunno i rather watch that. And if people stop watching F1, organisers will have no money to run it nomore. Plus constant pressure from ecologists make it even worse for f1 too. Honestly i think if it wasnt real problem for f1 they wouldnt introduced the cost cap in the first place
Cost caps are such a good idea imo. It levels the playing field and makes it an even fight (at least money wise) i think from this alone we will see much closer racing and different winners throughout the season
It’s be interesting if the cost cap works because you might see the slow return of teams such as Manor although it’s unlikely meaning there are more teams on the grid year after year and thus more competition than just 20 cars.
My main issue with this is the limiting of R&D time as it really isn’t any different to something like ballast. Ballast is more immediate and effects teams race to race whereas limiting R&D is more long term as it will be season to season. Whichever way you cut it though it’s still a succsss penalty - an artificial way to slow down the fastest team/driver until they’re not the fastest at which point the success penalty is reduced/lifted.
Honestly like the part of leveling out the field by for intance the cost cap. But do not like hindering rules like reduced wind tunnel hours for the winners.. it should be a even playong field, not being punished for winning..
I think it's good for the few years to balance out the fact that the strongest team have the best staff/drivers, which is a consequence of the previous seasons. I agree that the wind tunnel time should eventually return to being equal again.
This could have a very interesting side efect: Since drivers are not included, that means the larger teams can spend a LOT of money on drivers outside F1 itself to try to promote the best ones into F1, and since this does not guarantee these drivers will drive for the largest teams this could spill over other teams and drive up their competitiveness.
I stopped watching F1 a long time ago due to how dominant some teams have become. I've recently stumbled upon your videos, and this one suggests that F1 could get very competitive very soon. I might give a 2021 season a shot.
I don't understand the aerodynamics development cap. This is an advantage for constructors who have two team,i.e. redbull with alpha tauri. They both are sister companies. And pretty have similar engine and car dynamics,and they share information. So redbull racing can keep winning and ask there sister company to lose and do the dirty work for them. And I'd the model works you will see other teams like mercedes and ferrari putting more money and creating and bringing there sister teams so as to be competitive. Again to the downfall of bad teams like Haas/Williams
I really like this initiative. I've felt since 2010 that F1 had fallen into a sort of rut of a 3 tier race, where the top 3 teams were in the first tier and held the podium 95% of the time, and then the next 3 teams were always between 6th and 12th, and then the last 4 to 6 teams rounded out the field. It almost felt like a multi class race. It took the drama out of it and made it really boring to watch. It'll be nice to hopefully see more competition and mixed fields.
As soon as you put up the spending amounts I saw the corellation immediately. The amount a team spends almost exactly reflects where they end up in the constructors championship.
With the aero testing budget, I wonder if Red Bull could ask Alpha Tauri to test a certain thing for them or if Mercedes ask Racing dot to test something in exchange for a nice spring signed by Valtteri
I'd also love them giving lesser performing teams a bigger stock of components they can change during a season before receiving penalties. like for every 2 or 3 places down on championship rankings, you can change one more engine and not be put at the back of the grid. It'd give those teams the ability to tinker with their design, and not suffer both on the current race, but also on the next one because of being placed at the back
I completely agree with the budget caps but I dont agree with the Aero R&D limiting because to me that isnt much different than adding a success ballast and like you said can you really consider yourself a champion if youre fighting a crocked opponent. One thing I would like to see is the budget cap include things like drivers wages, pit crew wages, team principal wages etc with only administrative staff excluded from that umbrella.
Imagine this: a team massively overspends, gains enough advantage to be competitive and wins the championship. After that, they pull out of F1 completely after the last race in November. Then in March they're found guilty of overspending but there's no way of punishing it since said team isn't a member of F1 anymore.
Why would they overspend just to win one year and kill the team? They will be fined by the FIA even when they leave, and be stripped of the championship.
It is a money game for the constructors however, skill is needed for the drivers to get into the big teams - the big teams encourage/ensure a good future for young, talented drivers e.g. george russel and mercedes. With the price cap, for the drivers it is more of a lucky dip to which team they drive with. I am unsure whether this is a good or bad thing
This needs updating as Driver compensation is to be included into Team Salary Caps, Mercedes will now factor a driver as a performance aspect of team performance. New rules seem to be agreed for next year. High cost drivers mean reduced technical budget and vice versa.
The staggered development times seems like a cool and good idea, I just hope that it won't result in teams tanking at the end of a season to try and get more research time during the off season.
I think it could work quite well. If you do do that, you are giving up so much that it's probably not worth bothering; it's not like sandbagging at quali for Le Mans or other ways of circumventing these measures; if you try to do it here you're having to give up on an entire season's results, which I think will be too heavy a price to pay for some extra development time.
That’s true, and hopefully there would be enough pressure from sponsors for example to say that if their team does this they would remove their financial support since it’s still needed for the other things that fall outside of the budget cap
I think a way to make the grid fairer is to make the engine setup and rear and front wing between every team be the same during qualifying, so basically spec racing for qualifying, I understand richer teams will afford better drivers but I feel that’s fair, and the aero dynamics on the main body will be focused on and the teams with better aero should perform better but I don’t know a way around that. Opinions?
I thought of a way a budget cap could be better audited so that it doesn't happen all at the end of the season. It's still not great, but I think it's better. If we take the budget cap and split it into two groupings, then we can allow for auditors an easier job. Teams are researching and building next year's car, during a current season (in 2019 season teams were developing 2020 cars). The first budget cap group will limit how much they can spend on developing their next year's car during a current season. This budget report will then be due by pre-season testing. Teams are also researching and improving their current year's car over the course of a season. The second Budget cap group will limit how much they can spend on current season upgrades/developments. This will be due and reviewed at the end of season. So an easy example: if the budget cap was 100 million. We can split it into two groups, let's say 60/40. Using 2019/2020/2021 seasons, teams get 60 million to work on the 2020 car in the 2019 season. They submit their budgets at 2020 pre season testing. Then they get 40 million during the 2020 season to develop their car. They also get their 60 million to work on 2021's car. At the end of the 2020 season, they submit their budgets, completing the 2020 budget cap audit. Although it still has the same issue as possible position changes due to penalties after the fact, it would be less money to trace and an easier and quicker job to process. It also might help smaller teams as the money you can spend at a given time period is more restrictive, so bigger teams are forced to behave more like the smaller teams. I would love to know your guys' opinions on this idea! Yes, no? Any concerns you can think of with this idea?
I'm not entirely sure how the development cap (the windtunnel max) is going to achieve "skill=performance". If all the teams have the same amount of access to this, then it would be a matter of which teams are using their time best, that means a skill. Of course it would make it easier for the teams doing poorly to catch up, but I don't see that as "skill=performance". In fact, I see it mores as "doing poorly=performance".
I agree, I think the cost cap is a great idea but adding testing constraints goes against the idea that cost caps sets up. At least try JUST cost caps at first and if that doesn’t do enough then maybe add testing constraints.
I think they doing an awesome job here. The "Formular" in F1 basicly discribes, that everyone has to use the same formular to compete. But over the past, due to the diffrences in budged, they didn't. These rules now, taking everything that works well in others sports and putting the formular back on the development. Still, it gonna be years, before teams equal out, cause they have such a high diffrence in experience today.
Chain bear, I think you might have been the driving force behind the idea to limit aero development for the winning team. I had never heard of that kind of idea until you put out your video. And now, is official FIA policy. Hats off to you, sir. Well done. The sport will be so much better for it
Easiest example of a major cost cap breach,with the most harsh and severe punishment that worked, with the Melbourne Storm salary cap breaches (salary cap is literally the same as cost cap). Melbourne Storm have been the top NRL team for years, and pretty much since they were a thing. In 2010 it was found out for the last 5 years they had a second set of contracts and bookkeeping system that the NRL (FIA for rugby league) didn't know about, which ended up being around $3.78 million, which is significant when a top player gets over $1 million easily, but lower tiered players generally get around $500-800k. So, for the season they were in (this investigation occured in April 2010, and the season starts in March, couple of weeks before Albert Park is normally I believe) they deducted all their points from wins (championship points), and then barred them from earning anymore, even from byes (basically the team doesn't play for a week and gets the same amount of points for a win, keeping everything level and giving how ever many teams get byes a free week off). They ended up coming last, even while playing the rest of the season. To put it into terms for the F1 season, say Mercedes win 2021-2024 for example, by extreme measures, and literally no one contends with them. They get found out for breaching cost cap, they don't earn any points in 2025, or maybe even 2026 too, and a bunch more repercussions that I can't think of lol. it's not hard to understand ultimately.
@Nic Lazzari it did help some teams, although the top teams stayed at the top. Motogp seems to be inherently more competitive though, riders can make more of a difference
The only problem I have is with the CFD/windtunnel method being by rank. If Merc, Ferrari, and RBR are neck and neck, then they should be equally penalized with this method. Likewise if the 4th through 6th teams are neck and neck, then they should be equally boosted. Instead, the FIA should make the CFD time a function of race points. The more points you earn the less time you get in a CFD/windtunnel .
Looks like the March deadline on the previous year’s finances means that the FIA is capping spending per year, not per season. Having a fiscal year end on 31 December wouldn’t make sense whatsoever if it were done by season, as December’s budget is directed toward the following season, as opposed to the previous January/February, which would be the previous season. Having the report date in March is right after the teams spend the most money on development. At that point, teams will know how much they can spend, as opposed to having the ability to manipulate the books throughout the season to hide development spending.
I did find it amusing that, when the F1 channel released their video yesterday, they focused on how the rules helped current teams. New teams weren't mentioned at all, which I thought odd as this is the sort of thing that the FIA promised 10 years ago when Marussia, HRT and Caterham came in to the sport.
i dont know all the details but it sounds like there are too many loopholes. like underpaying ferraris staff for 10k/year but giving them 100k bonus if they finish higher than 9th in the constructors. a bit exaggerated but you get the idea
What I dont understand is why the next technical regs are even tighter than the current ones. That doesn't mesh with the restriction in budget as far as I see it.
interesting that bonuses are excluded - feels like banking where salaries will be low, and top teams will be able to afford huge bonuses for employees.
3:10 Lol, I genuinely love that Mr. Wolff editing. 🤣😂 5:55 Ah yes, Schumi, Todt and Brawn. Basically the much more intelligent... ummm... name for me a rock band with just three members.
Aero development time caps will be very interesting to see how they affect things! 1 question where these new caps voted in/on by teams? Just thinking if the 'big 2' have agreed do they know it wont really affect their conpetitive order? Good vid!
*Aero development time cap:* it makes sense to do that, if you want to account for a situation where you have 16 teams for example. You don't want to reduce the winning team to an unreasonably low amount of wind tunnel and other aero related R&D. If you set a minimum R&D time for the WCC (70% of norm) you can scale up from there. If the winning constructor wants more R&D time, it automatically translates to a proportional increase for all the lower placed teams. It's a good solution that seems more complicated in theory, than it would be in practice. That being said... the idea of 16 teams makes me salivate lol
@perp1exed Dude it doesn't make sense because it disadvantages those who do a good job. It's like fighting someone you just beat with your hands tied behind your back. That's not sport. Liberty is shifting f1 into WWE levels of showmanship. It's not working in nascar. It will not work here. If everyone has the same starting point (budget), then why further hobble the previous winner? We don't expect Serena Williams to play with a heavier racket because she won last years' Wimbledon. Bolt is given lead shoes to compensate for his natural speed, just so we have a photo finish.
The budget cap was a great step in the right direction to level the playing field. Now they need to address the prize money distribution for constructors. I think the made some changes last year in the 8th Concorde Agreement but looks like it's still heavily weighted towards the top teams. The bonusses for the top 3 especially are ridiculous (more than the fixed amount of Col 1 and the points-based amount of Col 2!) and are going to teams who are going to make money hand over fist from their success anyway, from sponsorship deals, advertising, investors, etc. The share that Ferrari get regardless of their results for being a "historic team" needs to end. That just reeks of collusion and favoritism at this point. Last year they got more money than any other team including the teams ahead of them! Doubt anything will change with Stefano Domenicali at the wheel of FOG though... If they want to reward longevity---which is laudable---they should distribute that share among the teams proportionally to the number of consecutive years they've been competing. Ferrari would still get the biggest share but it would also reward teams like McLaren, Williams, Sauber... who have stuck to it through thick and thin. It would also incentivize others to stay in the race rather than leave and come back based on their own R&D or marketing needs, or the whims of their management (e.g. Renault and Honda).
Valtteri, it's James. I need you to sign this expensive spring for Williams.
What's this spring joke?
@@ryandownes3612 Valtteri was a Williams driver at one point.
the only thing i can think of is that massa was his team mate in williams at some point, and a suspension spring smashed massa in the face when he was with ferrari
@@mikespearwood3914 a random joke and example from chain bear
Rearranging Bottas' name's letters you get Battery Voltage
Maybe a really good spring signed by Valteri Bottas is all Williams needs to win though?
He's an ex-Williams driver, maybe they need the spirit of Finnish
My exact thoughts 😂😂😂
Race Engineers HATE HIM for this ONE SIMPLE TRICK
Valtteri*
Boi Sandwich who cares?
So using Comic Sans on your report would be a lesser infraction than going over the budget 5%
Already unbalanced.
Comic sans is a good font
@@charleyatkins9094 its ok
From a former user of Comic Sans... It should yield a heavier punishment
_(Thank God I saw the light!)_
Ferrari could not win with half a billion dollar budget. I don't know what they're going to do with 145m.
Play ping pong 🏓
SLVRFOX88 honestly
@@ryanhealy9342 What are we doing ?
They will use the rest to pay Lewis and Max not to drive
@@vojtechnovacek7776 Better yet, pay Lewis and Max to race WEC or Indycar.
3:17. Hit driver with mallet before race😂😂😂😂😂
I can see Gunther Steiner attempting this but perhaps not on the other team's drivers.
Closing /opening door harshly as well
Ryan Chan I mean it’s not like it’s gonna make Grosjean MORE stupid.....
And the "Stunt Regen"
This would probably improve Kimi's driving. ;)
8:34 Using Comic Sans should clearly be an inmediate disqualification from the championship.
Shall we just extend that to a perpetual ban on entry to any FIA-sanctioned events?
Sorry mate, but i'm on the opposing side regarding Comic Sans.
"We're just developing this F1 style engine for our road program, then for other reasons we're not using it on the road, so we've stuck it in the back of our F1 car".
This year Red Bull have given Adrian Newey his own personal supercomputer for his home, and if he happens to spend every waking moment running CFD, who are we to stop it?
That my friend is called a loophole
Yes all of that is possible, just like Spy Gate is possible, but there is a reason why it just does not happen every day. Sporting integrity IS a thing with most people, and penalties for inevitably uncovered truth, could be severe.
Ah the unfair advantage well I suppose he can just run CFD whilst he out with the kids?
In Bird culture this is considered a dick move.
I won't be surprised if they already run CFD offsite and only bring ideas that work into the official windtunnel.
It would be nice to see the cost cap be followed up with some relaxation of the technical regulations to allow for more innovation. Mercedes had the money to develop DAS or their blown wheel hubs, above and beyond what most teams budgets could have ever allowed. Same with Red Bull developing their blown diffuser. Small teams never had the spare capital to try and figure out how to copy those designs and make them as good. Meanwhile, a small team would find some great idea copied swiftly and then be out developed.
Tighter budgets and restricting development hours means that teams will be able to pull themselves up the grid by developing an idea with skill and knowledge, and it'll take time for last year's champions to develop their version of your great idea.
Exactly. If a team had excellent engineers that are innovative then they should be rewarded for those innovations
Can't teams just hide salaries as end of year bonuses? Like Mercedes saying "If we finished higher than ninth in the Constructors Championship in 2021 (which they will) your Bonus will make your minimum wage Job with pay you deserve.
This would probably still be included in the budget, since the bonuses are part of employee expenses
Of course they will do that. Red Bull for example always has worked with bonuses and after they became champions in 2012 the entire 657 staff members got 12 350 EUR bonus.
@@DizMizzer ye but that is a legitimate bonus. What the other guy meant is basically underpaying staff but with bonus clauses that will with 99.999% certainty be met.
I would like to think that F1 realize that could be a work around and that in the finer legalese details for these bedget caps stuff like that is still considered a breach of the rules. Something like reasonable scale, like 6th getting a 1500 bonus each to first getting a 12000 dollar like the Red Bull one mentioned below, would still be accepted but it's not like the board deciding on the rules to present are complete apes, they aren't going to just let Mercedes or Ferrari pay everyone the lowest possible wage and then bonus it all up to what it was for finishing at least 5 races.
Drivers are already exempt. They said your three highest paid employees. That might not actually include drivers but only because they are all exempted.
If they exempted the top three so teams could compete for them.
P
Well drivers obviously falls in that same category.
H,,
This should be interesting
Should it be? It should.
@@hanjarake_taro Yes, it should be
Yeah, it should
it should indeed
12:15 They might've gone over 100% for when/if more teams join the grid, because in this case the top team will still have 75%, no matter the amount of teams. If they would benchmark the lowest classified team as 100% and 2 more teams join in, the top team would lose another 2/15th of their otherwise allocated aero development time.
Or because 90% of 100 is not the same as 77.5% of 112.5 (~87) and they didn't want to do the maths to work out the system from one end or the other.
"even if it's a good spring signed by Valtteri Bottas"
Deaddd 😂😂😂
Valtteri, it's James.
I think that was because a fan dressed up in sebs suit and helmet went and got something signed by valtteri, idk when but I saw the vid last week
“Driver hit with mallet before race” lol
9:55 “The FIA are very reticent to undo results once they’ve been ratified” Um watching this in Feb 2022 and how relevant this statement still is
Three years ago I saw a video on your channel for the first time, it is incredible how much you have improved the animation. Congratulations, you always produce very high quality content.
I want a spring signed by valteri bottas
I prefer one from Rubens' Brawn. Felipe may disagree.
5:51 Skill Strategy and Ingenuity = Schumacher, Todt and Brawn? AMAZING!
Seriously though, why would anyone down vote a chainbear video? 🤦♀️
NASCAR fans
Parkinson's?
Comic Sans users.
@@nishparbhoo7070 what would NASCAR fans who aren't also fans of F1 even be doing here?
ShrekNSkrub Gaming ikr, I’m a fan of both
Great video, thank you for simple explanations of such complicated things!
How the hell did you see this 5 hours ago?
Watch before commenting 😏🌚
@@AceixSmart He did
@@chinmaysutagatti540 He's a member
I follow several F1 youtubers, but you are by far the most knowledgeable and do the best job of explaining all the F1 intricacies. Well done Sir.
10:21 3.6 Roentgen
Not great not terrible.
"I'm told it's the equivalent of a chest xray"
You're delusional!!
That's as high as the meter goes
It didn't blow up. Tell me how an rbmk reactor blows up!
With such a cost cap it won't be about who can spend the most but about who has the best lawyers and accountants who can bring the most money oitside of the cost cap. For example I can imagine that staff salaries will become minimum wage and it will be filled up with bonusses or that the brand Mercedes or Redbull does a lot of windtunnel testing and development of parts as a "hobby" and that the data will be given for free to the F1 teams. It will be a game of who can get away with the best loopholes to escape the cost cap.
All in favour of a cost cap but I'm a bit 50/50 on development caps, just feels a bit off capping development in the "pinnacle of motorsport". I guess it depends if you want truly the best cars that teams can make or competitive racing, maybe they'll balance both but it'll be interesting to see🤔
Rlly needed this vid
Thx
One thing that I'd like to see, instead of a cost CAP, make it a cost threshold, any team that goes over it must give 2x the amount to the lowest cost team, so that won't stop them from spending, but if they do, the money would also go to someone who needs more money to spend.
Farm teams will like this. lol
Awww man that wind tunnel animation oh wow so pretty
I think this is the adjustment F1 really needed for years! I am stoked to learn how it turns out!
3:16 "hit driver with mallet before race" is waaay better than thr cost cap
Gunther Steiner would love to have that
I like the cost cap as it addresses some of F1's issues without turning it into a spec series, but the development cap sucks. They should be narrowing the gap by putting everyone on an even playing field instead of prescribing handicaps. With less R&D time the top teams will be more likely to stick with what already works, as they won't have the time to risk on testing something new, and it will end up stifling innovation
@John Dongle Like you, I hate the b.o.p development cap. I hate the new age thinking that everyone deserves to win. My kids aren't allowed to win, even though they're faster because it not fair to the slower children. What kinda backwards devolution mentality is that. People watch sport because it's the closest thing to war and the physical manifestation of competition. I don't want to watch a sport questioning whether the winner won because he's better or because the other guy is forced to wear lead shoes/gloves etc.
The budget cap is a great idea, but other stuff is pure cow manure.
The FIA is pretty good at stifling innovative ideas. They just ban anything interesting.
A very informative video except that you have to first watch an ad from youtube at the start and then watch another ad for a minute from the sponsors and watch one more ad in between the video
Your videos are so informative, thoughtful, and easy to understand. You're a legend, thanks man!
I like the idea of spending caps to make F1 more competitive, but if it reduces the developments that we see coming out of F1 (which it will) then I think it invalidates a major reason why F1 is important to several of the large manufacturers.
I mean, maybe Im not F1's primary type of audience, but am I the only one who wants to see the best machine possible no matter what? Honestly I care more about the machines than the drivers, which is why I dont particularly care if the racing action is a bit dull. Even if every race has the same winner, to me its a way of saying, "yep, under those conditions also, this machine (and driver of course) is still best." And I suppose if the racing action is what you want then doing whatever you can to level the field is best I guess, but for me, I will always be more attracted to humans pushing technology to its limit than making sure someone new wins each week.
The nice thing about the aero rule as a system to hamper winning teams is that:
1 - it does make it harder for a team like Merc to get the aero on the car perfect, hopefully opening up the comp to smaller teams.
2 - They can theoretically still pull off a radical, ingenious idea, like F-ducts, or reduce time required in the wind tunnel with exceptional engineering. And that type of development is really about having the right people and winning through skill/brilliance, rather than just a stack of $$$.
Really good explanation. Thank you!
12:15 Why they didn't put 100% at slowest team? Maybe it's for adding new teams. That way if the number of teams changes, it's easier to adjust and make clear what is and isn't allowed.
Would that also be easy if the fastest team had 100%?
Thank you chain bear. I would be lost without your videos. They are so helpful. I love your work.
this was a really good video dude. Love your stuff. Always makes me happy to see one. Also, I love watching your editing improve little by little every video, like the wind tunnel stuff in this one. Great job as always mate.
Was just thinking when will you are going to publish something on this topic and you uploaded this video. Thanks a bunch mate.
Finally. I was anticipating this yesterday after reading the news. Great breakdowns! Thank you
the cost cap the main issue i see is how difficult it will be to police
im not sure i like the wind tunnel time reduction though, maybe with a period of stable rules it might produce the desired effect, but whenever there is a rule change that is going to give teams who did worse last year a big advantage rather than levelling the playing field
something that the recent talk of customer cars made me think of which i feel like could be a better solution would be if at some point during the season (towards the end), all teams made the designs/details of that years car public, that could include wind tunnel data etc etc. there is already some copying of ideas but teams try to hide stuff.
this to me seems a better way of having every team start each new season on a level footing.
F1 actually is in very bad situation now, and not because of Coronavirus. Formula E for example has a way more competitive teams and far more exciting races and so gained a huge popularity already. Lets be honest, majority of people like me doesnt care about all that engineering and just wants to see exciting racing. And its proven fact looking at tendency of fan base growth. Cost cap is the only future for F1 because if they dont do something about 3 teams winning everything and everyonr else toileting at the back, they could be well out of business by 2040
@@bosshard64 i dont really agree with that overall, i havent always liked the end result but i have enjoyed some of the racing recently, and i think at least some of the "problem" is rose tinted glasses
the comparison with formula e does raise some points though, i believe in formula e all the cars are prescribed, which can result in closer on track racing, it does take away some of the innovation though which is an area that has always been a big factor in f1
as for predictions that companies will be out of business in x years, ive been hearing that about different companies for as long as i can remember and so far most of them have been followed by most companies posting their best ever financial year, while i think covid might have stopped that happening to f1 this year those predictions always seems to just be someone who is bitter about something,
@@custard131 i dunno fe already has over two millions followers tho it lasted just 6 years! Many people switch to fe now although some f1 races were exciting, when fe has over 10 potential winners every race i dunno i rather watch that. And if people stop watching F1, organisers will have no money to run it nomore. Plus constant pressure from ecologists make it even worse for f1 too. Honestly i think if it wasnt real problem for f1 they wouldnt introduced the cost cap in the first place
@@bosshard64 im not saying they shouldnt be trying to improve, but i think they are a long way from dying
SO HYPED, THANKS F1 for taking action!
Cost caps are such a good idea imo. It levels the playing field and makes it an even fight (at least money wise) i think from this alone we will see much closer racing and different winners throughout the season
It’s be interesting if the cost cap works because you might see the slow return of teams such as Manor although it’s unlikely meaning there are more teams on the grid year after year and thus more competition than just 20 cars.
2021 is gonna be amazing to watch. Equal field, anyone could win.
Phenomenal explanations and research into these videos. absolutely love it!!
My main issue with this is the limiting of R&D time as it really isn’t any different to something like ballast. Ballast is more immediate and effects teams race to race whereas limiting R&D is more long term as it will be season to season. Whichever way you cut it though it’s still a succsss penalty - an artificial way to slow down the fastest team/driver until they’re not the fastest at which point the success penalty is reduced/lifted.
Honestly like the part of leveling out the field by for intance the cost cap. But do not like hindering rules like reduced wind tunnel hours for the winners.. it should be a even playong field, not being punished for winning..
I think it's good for the few years to balance out the fact that the strongest team have the best staff/drivers, which is a consequence of the previous seasons. I agree that the wind tunnel time should eventually return to being equal again.
Hard agree, how can be anyone down with this?
You are literally punished for doing well. Selling the sport to the merricans was a big mistake
I think it could work. Like in hockey for example, the teams who place worse get the first picks at the draft, which seems to be working well.
This could have a very interesting side efect: Since drivers are not included, that means the larger teams can spend a LOT of money on drivers outside F1 itself to try to promote the best ones into F1, and since this does not guarantee these drivers will drive for the largest teams this could spill over other teams and drive up their competitiveness.
Just started getting into F1, these videos are great and very helpful. Keep up the great work.
I stopped watching F1 a long time ago due to how dominant some teams have become. I've recently stumbled upon your videos, and this one suggests that F1 could get very competitive very soon. I might give a 2021 season a shot.
Hope you did
3:17 "Hit driver with mallet before race"
Chainbear getting REAL creative
I don't understand the aerodynamics development cap. This is an advantage for constructors who have two team,i.e. redbull with alpha tauri. They both are sister companies. And pretty have similar engine and car dynamics,and they share information. So redbull racing can keep winning and ask there sister company to lose and do the dirty work for them. And I'd the model works you will see other teams like mercedes and ferrari putting more money and creating and bringing there sister teams so as to be competitive. Again to the downfall of bad teams like Haas/Williams
I loved this video a lot by the way, very informative *and* very fun!
I really like this initiative.
I've felt since 2010 that F1 had fallen into a sort of rut of a 3 tier race, where the top 3 teams were in the first tier and held the podium 95% of the time, and then the next 3 teams were always between 6th and 12th, and then the last 4 to 6 teams rounded out the field. It almost felt like a multi class race.
It took the drama out of it and made it really boring to watch.
It'll be nice to hopefully see more competition and mixed fields.
As soon as you put up the spending amounts I saw the corellation immediately. The amount a team spends almost exactly reflects where they end up in the constructors championship.
This will make F1 more fun and fair again! Can't wait for 2021!
I just love your videos and educational expertise. Thanks for all your efforts. I continue to learn and enjoy F1.
8:37 or you used comic sans or something. Lmao 😂
With the aero testing budget, I wonder if Red Bull could ask Alpha Tauri to test a certain thing for them or if Mercedes ask Racing dot to test something in exchange for a nice spring signed by Valtteri
I hate punishing success. Lets see what the cost caps do and how effective they are before we start punishing the top team.
I'd also love them giving lesser performing teams a bigger stock of components they can change during a season before receiving penalties. like for every 2 or 3 places down on championship rankings, you can change one more engine and not be put at the back of the grid. It'd give those teams the ability to tinker with their design, and not suffer both on the current race, but also on the next one because of being placed at the back
I completely agree with the budget caps but I dont agree with the Aero R&D limiting because to me that isnt much different than adding a success ballast and like you said can you really consider yourself a champion if youre fighting a crocked opponent. One thing I would like to see is the budget cap include things like drivers wages, pit crew wages, team principal wages etc with only administrative staff excluded from that umbrella.
Imagine this: a team massively overspends, gains enough advantage to be competitive and wins the championship. After that, they pull out of F1 completely after the last race in November. Then in March they're found guilty of overspending but there's no way of punishing it since said team isn't a member of F1 anymore.
I suppose their self imposed exile from the sport would be their punishment in that case
f1 will take the championship money back in court
I suppose they can be banned if there is obvious oberspending?
Why would they overspend just to win one year and kill the team? They will be fined by the FIA even when they leave, and be stripped of the championship.
Then two seasons after they win, they join back, and since they’re technically last, they get the additional aero R&D time
It is a money game for the constructors however, skill is needed for the drivers to get into the big teams - the big teams encourage/ensure a good future for young, talented drivers e.g. george russel and mercedes. With the price cap, for the drivers it is more of a lucky dip to which team they drive with. I am unsure whether this is a good or bad thing
I really look forward to this new generation of F1. It makes races more interesting and unpredictable.
This needs updating as Driver compensation is to be included into Team Salary Caps, Mercedes will now factor a driver as a performance aspect of team performance. New rules seem to be agreed for next year. High cost drivers mean reduced technical budget and vice versa.
The staggered development times seems like a cool and good idea, I just hope that it won't result in teams tanking at the end of a season to try and get more research time during the off season.
to stop that it should be based off points, not position. Put the championship winner points at X and each point lost is more time
I think it could work quite well. If you do do that, you are giving up so much that it's probably not worth bothering; it's not like sandbagging at quali for Le Mans or other ways of circumventing these measures; if you try to do it here you're having to give up on an entire season's results, which I think will be too heavy a price to pay for some extra development time.
That’s true, and hopefully there would be enough pressure from sponsors for example to say that if their team does this they would remove their financial support since it’s still needed for the other things that fall outside of the budget cap
I think a way to make the grid fairer is to make the engine setup and rear and front wing between every team be the same during qualifying, so basically spec racing for qualifying, I understand richer teams will afford better drivers but I feel that’s fair, and the aero dynamics on the main body will be focused on and the teams with better aero should perform better but I don’t know a way around that. Opinions?
I really like the wind tunnel idea. Off track meddling that we don’t see until the cars are racing
Best comprehensive video review on the internet
Thanks!
This will be great to watch play out in the real world
I thought of a way a budget cap could be better audited so that it doesn't happen all at the end of the season. It's still not great, but I think it's better.
If we take the budget cap and split it into two groupings, then we can allow for auditors an easier job.
Teams are researching and building next year's car, during a current season (in 2019 season teams were developing 2020 cars). The first budget cap group will limit how much they can spend on developing their next year's car during a current season. This budget report will then be due by pre-season testing.
Teams are also researching and improving their current year's car over the course of a season. The second Budget cap group will limit how much they can spend on current season upgrades/developments. This will be due and reviewed at the end of season.
So an easy example: if the budget cap was 100 million. We can split it into two groups, let's say 60/40. Using 2019/2020/2021 seasons, teams get 60 million to work on the 2020 car in the 2019 season. They submit their budgets at 2020 pre season testing. Then they get 40 million during the 2020 season to develop their car. They also get their 60 million to work on 2021's car. At the end of the 2020 season, they submit their budgets, completing the 2020 budget cap audit. Although it still has the same issue as possible position changes due to penalties after the fact, it would be less money to trace and an easier and quicker job to process.
It also might help smaller teams as the money you can spend at a given time period is more restrictive, so bigger teams are forced to behave more like the smaller teams.
I would love to know your guys' opinions on this idea! Yes, no? Any concerns you can think of with this idea?
Excellent articulation!
Video length on point
I'm not entirely sure how the development cap (the windtunnel max) is going to achieve "skill=performance". If all the teams have the same amount of access to this, then it would be a matter of which teams are using their time best, that means a skill.
Of course it would make it easier for the teams doing poorly to catch up, but I don't see that as "skill=performance". In fact, I see it mores as "doing poorly=performance".
I agree, I think the cost cap is a great idea but adding testing constraints goes against the idea that cost caps sets up. At least try JUST cost caps at first and if that doesn’t do enough then maybe add testing constraints.
I think they doing an awesome job here. The "Formular" in F1 basicly discribes, that everyone has to use the same formular to compete. But over the past, due to the diffrences in budged, they didn't. These rules now, taking everything that works well in others sports and putting the formular back on the development. Still, it gonna be years, before teams equal out, cause they have such a high diffrence in experience today.
If you use comic sans in your financial reports: Drive though penalty.
Chain bear, I think you might have been the driving force behind the idea to limit aero development for the winning team. I had never heard of that kind of idea until you put out your video. And now, is official FIA policy.
Hats off to you, sir. Well done. The sport will be so much better for it
Chair Bear's absolutely amazing videos!! ❤️
Easiest example of a major cost cap breach,with the most harsh and severe punishment that worked, with the Melbourne Storm salary cap breaches (salary cap is literally the same as cost cap).
Melbourne Storm have been the top NRL team for years, and pretty much since they were a thing. In 2010 it was found out for the last 5 years they had a second set of contracts and bookkeeping system that the NRL (FIA for rugby league) didn't know about, which ended up being around $3.78 million, which is significant when a top player gets over $1 million easily, but lower tiered players generally get around $500-800k. So, for the season they were in (this investigation occured in April 2010, and the season starts in March, couple of weeks before Albert Park is normally I believe) they deducted all their points from wins (championship points), and then barred them from earning anymore, even from byes (basically the team doesn't play for a week and gets the same amount of points for a win, keeping everything level and giving how ever many teams get byes a free week off). They ended up coming last, even while playing the rest of the season.
To put it into terms for the F1 season, say Mercedes win 2021-2024 for example, by extreme measures, and literally no one contends with them. They get found out for breaching cost cap, they don't earn any points in 2025, or maybe even 2026 too, and a bunch more repercussions that I can't think of lol. it's not hard to understand ultimately.
MotoGP had a similar set of “concessions” rules a few years ago where smaller teams could use more engines and softer tyres throughout a season
@Nic Lazzari it did help some teams, although the top teams stayed at the top. Motogp seems to be inherently more competitive though, riders can make more of a difference
Actually success ballast works very well in SuperGT, keeps the racing exciting
The only problem I have is with the CFD/windtunnel method being by rank. If Merc, Ferrari, and RBR are neck and neck, then they should be equally penalized with this method. Likewise if the 4th through 6th teams are neck and neck, then they should be equally boosted. Instead, the FIA should make the CFD time a function of race points. The more points you earn the less time you get in a CFD/windtunnel .
Looks like the March deadline on the previous year’s finances means that the FIA is capping spending per year, not per season. Having a fiscal year end on 31 December wouldn’t make sense whatsoever if it were done by season, as December’s budget is directed toward the following season, as opposed to the previous January/February, which would be the previous season. Having the report date in March is right after the teams spend the most money on development. At that point, teams will know how much they can spend, as opposed to having the ability to manipulate the books throughout the season to hide development spending.
Wow, impressive, you can make such detailed information extremely tangible
I did find it amusing that, when the F1 channel released their video yesterday, they focused on how the rules helped current teams. New teams weren't mentioned at all, which I thought odd as this is the sort of thing that the FIA promised 10 years ago when Marussia, HRT and Caterham came in to the sport.
They did mention new teams in the article version, but yes.. the video version did not mention it
i dont know all the details but it sounds like there are too many loopholes. like underpaying ferraris staff for 10k/year but giving them 100k bonus if they finish higher than 9th in the constructors. a bit exaggerated but you get the idea
What I dont understand is why the next technical regs are even tighter than the current ones. That doesn't mesh with the restriction in budget as far as I see it.
I don't know man, I don't think I could resist buying a $40m Bottas signed spring...
Ryan, this is James. You will not have the spring.
That aero development what a seems flawed to me🤔
interesting that bonuses are excluded - feels like banking where salaries will be low, and top teams will be able to afford huge bonuses for employees.
3:10 Lol, I genuinely love that Mr. Wolff editing. 🤣😂
5:55 Ah yes, Schumi, Todt and Brawn. Basically the much more intelligent... ummm... name for me a rock band with just three members.
Aero development time caps will be very interesting to see how they affect things!
1 question where these new caps voted in/on by teams? Just thinking if the 'big 2' have agreed do they know it wont really affect their conpetitive order? Good vid!
"2020 is a bit of a shitshow" Understatement of the week so far
1:33 Renault's invisible budget
Maybe your monitor is messing up the yellows a bit. I can see it just fine.
*Aero development time cap:* it makes sense to do that, if you want to account for a situation where you have 16 teams for example. You don't want to reduce the winning team to an unreasonably low amount of wind tunnel and other aero related R&D. If you set a minimum R&D time for the WCC (70% of norm) you can scale up from there. If the winning constructor wants more R&D time, it automatically translates to a proportional increase for all the lower placed teams. It's a good solution that seems more complicated in theory, than it would be in practice. That being said... the idea of 16 teams makes me salivate lol
@perp1exed Dude it doesn't make sense because it disadvantages those who do a good job. It's like fighting someone you just beat with your hands tied behind your back. That's not sport. Liberty is shifting f1 into WWE levels of showmanship. It's not working in nascar. It will not work here. If everyone has the same starting point (budget), then why further hobble the previous winner? We don't expect Serena Williams to play with a heavier racket because she won last years' Wimbledon. Bolt is given lead shoes to compensate for his natural speed, just so we have a photo finish.
Chain bear. great vid as always. What do you use to animate your videos btw. would love to see a behind the scenes look into the making of a video.
The budget cap was a great step in the right direction to level the playing field. Now they need to address the prize money distribution for constructors. I think the made some changes last year in the 8th Concorde Agreement but looks like it's still heavily weighted towards the top teams. The bonusses for the top 3 especially are ridiculous (more than the fixed amount of Col 1 and the points-based amount of Col 2!) and are going to teams who are going to make money hand over fist from their success anyway, from sponsorship deals, advertising, investors, etc. The share that Ferrari get regardless of their results for being a "historic team" needs to end. That just reeks of collusion and favoritism at this point. Last year they got more money than any other team including the teams ahead of them! Doubt anything will change with Stefano Domenicali at the wheel of FOG though... If they want to reward longevity---which is laudable---they should distribute that share among the teams proportionally to the number of consecutive years they've been competing. Ferrari would still get the biggest share but it would also reward teams like McLaren, Williams, Sauber... who have stuck to it through thick and thin. It would also incentivize others to stay in the race rather than leave and come back based on their own R&D or marketing needs, or the whims of their management (e.g. Renault and Honda).
Wow thank you for this!!