Bleacher Report - Articles by Duncan Scott

F1 2010: A Whole New World

Duncan Scott — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:16:34 -0400

It looks like a Brit will win the 2009 title (as is the proper order in F1!), but Button was born to bore, and I just can't take an interest. The other side of the hill is always greener, and from where I sit, the 2010 pastures look green, lush, and very inviting.

BMW (the ultimate losing machine) will be gone and there will be a raft of new teams on the grid. Realistically, nobody expects that any of them will be contenders for honours, but nobody expected Brawn GP to be massively strong this year. We all like surprises, don't we?

Having confirmation that Fernando Alonso is to drive for Ferrari next year has been a blow for some - not all - of the Tifosi. As an F1 fan, I welcome the move of a ferociously competitive driver to a team that should give him a car capable of challenging for regular podiums.

It does seem an insult to Kimi Raikkonen, but his bank balance will not be offended and it should motivate him to grind Ferrari's face in the dirt if he gets the chance.

And if the much-rumoured return of Kimi to McLaren takes place, we should see Lewis Hamilton given a sterner test than Heikki Kovaleinen has provided. Lewis will never be able to win over his detractors, of course, whatever happens.

If he beats Kimi, we shall hear all the talk about the favoured son of McLaren again, whereas if Kimi is the quicker, it will be trumpeted that Lewis was never any good.

The game of driver musical chairs does not seem to favour Robert Kubica. A few seasons ago, he was almost everybody's pick as a future world champion, but now his star has faded, and Seb Vettel wears the mantle of the future king.

Sad for the Pole, and a reminder that the vast majority of F1 drivers pass through the sport without carving their names on its history.

Rule changes for 2010 are not finalised yet as a consequence of the FIA-FOTA dispute, but we know about some.

There will be no refuelling during races, which will mean cars having bigger tanks and starting each race very heavy. The huge benefit is the end of race results being decided by fuel strategy.

At all stages of the race, drivers will have approximately equal fuel loads - depending on their engine's fuel consumption - and that should mean better racing.

Qualifying will change.

There will still be three qualifying periods and all drivers will set their fastest time with a low fuel load, so we will see no more of the bizarre, "fuel-adjusted" grid tables.

Teammates will be qualifying and starting the race with exactly the same amounts of fuel, which must mean a greater measure of driver equality within teams.

Almost certainly, tire warmers will be banned, meaning that drivers will have to use more skill and judgement getting rubber up to race temperature after a pit stop. Few would argue with that.

KERS is likely to still be with us, and the minimum car weight is being raised to make it a more attractive option to larger drivers such as the aforementioned Kubica.

There are a number of rule changes not yet finalised.

The position is that 2009 rules will apply except where teams agree to a change; FOTA's victory is that complete.

It is probable that wheel covers will be banned and that bodywork changes will reduce the risk of driver X having his tires cut by the front wing of driver Y.

So roll on, 2010.

New teams, an interesting driver reshuffle, and a fundamental change to race strategy - great stuff. Good times? I think so.

How Was Felipe Massa Injured?

Duncan Scott — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 07:01:03 -0400

Felipe Massa's accident in Hungary on July 25th will remain one of the unpleasant memories of the 2009 F1 season.

At the time of writing it is not known if Felipe will ever return to the sport, one can only hope so. He has been a likeable and popular driver, and there can be no doubt that every F1 fan wishes him well. Volte quando você está bem, Felipe.

Unfortunately, Felipe's injuries were quite severe.

The military hospital in Budapest where he was first treated revealed that he had suffered a brain contusion, fractures to his forehead and the base of his skull, and that bone fragments had been removed from around his left eye. Bruising and lacerations around his left eye were evident when he was lifted from the car, and he is to have a titanium plate fitted to cover a gap in his skull.

So how was Massa so badly injured?

That might seem a dumb question, for every F1 fan knows that a suspension spring came adrift from Rubens Barichello's car and subsequently struck Massa's helmet.

But again I ask, how was Massa so badly injured? Let's look at the sequence of events, referring to my screenshots composite.

In frame 1 we see the errant spring about to hit Massa's helmet. I think we can agree that Massa was uninjured at this stage.

Frame 2 shows the spring in close-up as it passes the camera after striking Massa's helmet. Was Massa injured at this stage? And if so, how?

Look at my title photo, the famous shot of Felipe being lifted from his wrecked car. The media narrative is that the spring made the helmet gouge we can see, and at the same time dislodged the visor from it's left-side fastening.

But did it inflict any injury on Felipe? If that spring had actually struck him where we see his injuries the eye would surely have been destroyed. And as neither the helmet or visor were penetrated, it seems improbable that the spring made contact with the driver's face.

Here's my tiresome question again. How was Massa injured?

Returning to the screenshot composite, in frames 3 and 4 the car is out of control and heading for a tyre barrier.

Clearly, Massa was stunned by the impact on his helmet, but he was braking, and that may have saved his life.

In frame 5 we see the crucial moment. As the car hits the tyre barrier Massa's head is thrown forward and strikes the steering wheel.

That is precisely what should not have happened, and I suspect that is the moment serious injuries were sustained.

In frame 6 Massa's head has snapped back again, the damage is done.

Many racing drivers have died because their heads were thrown forward in a crash and they suffered basilar skull fractures. Among the grim list of fatalities are Roland Ratzenberger and Dale Earnhardt.

To prevent such injuries the HANS (Head And Neck Safety) Device has long been mandatory in F1 and all top-level motor racing.

Here I quote from Wikipedia: The purpose of the device is to stop the head from "whipping forward" in a crash, without otherwise restricting movement of the neck.

So why didn't it work for Felipe?

The spring coming off Barichello's car was an unfortunate occurrence, but such things can happen.

For the spring to then strike Massa's helmet was as bizarrely unlikely as being struck by lightning on your birthday, but it should not have threatened a man's life.

What followed seems to have been a major failure of F1's driver safety systems. Yet eight weeks after the accident it has been largely unremarked upon, and the motor racing world is content for the public to think Felipe Massa was severely injured by a flying spring.

I find that very strange.

Thanks for reading, please let me know what you think.

Farewell Flavio: A Brief History Of F1's Playboy

Duncan Scott — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:28:26 -0400

In the interests of protecting the environment portions of this text have been re-cycled.

Today September 16th 2009 we have seen Flavio Briatore take his leave of Renault, and it is fair to say he departs under unfortunate circumstances.

Having guided two drivers to four world championships, he is now a very familiar face to us. Soccer tycoon, nightclub owner, and babe-magnet, Flavio Briatore is an improbable character who could have stepped from the pages of a steamy novel.

He has been in many a scrape, made an enormous fortune, and has dated some of the world's most beautiful women, including Naomi Campbell, Adriana Volpe, Eva Herzigova, Elle Macpherson, and Heidi Klum.

So who is Flavio, and where did he come from?

In this brief history of the master of bling, bonk, and billions, we take a stroll down memory lane to see how Flavio became the man he is today.

The Clothing Mogul

As a young man Flavio's nickname was Tribula, meaning someone who will do whatever it takes to get what he wants. By the late 1970's our hero had done a lot of things, and had become assistant to mafia-connected businessman Attilio Dutto in Cuneo.

In 1979 Dutto was killed by a car bomb, and his main business Paramatti Vernici collapsed into bankruptcy. Briatore moved on to Milan, where he worked in the stock market. Crucially, there he met and became friends with Luciano Benetton, founder and owner of the clothing empire.

The liquidation of Paramatti Vernici became a criminal investigation, and Briatore was convicted of fraud. Not wishing to serve his four year prison sentence, Flavio went on the run to the Virgin Islands, where he again met up with Luciano Benetton.

At the time Benetton was exanding his chain of clothing stores to the US, and he appointed his friend Flavio to run the operation.

Using a franchising business model, Briatore opened hundreds of Benetton stores in the US over the next decade, and because he received a slice of every franchise fee he became a very wealthy man.

The F1 Boss

In 1986 Benetton took over the Toleman F1 team they had previously sponsored. They were a mid-field team, but Luciano wanted better than that, and he had just the man for the job.

So on November 13 1988 Flavio Briatore was taken to see the team in action at the Adelaide Street Circuit in Australia. Thierry Boutsen scored a 5th place for Benetton, which was a good result for them.

Shortly after the race Briatore was appointed Commercial Director of Benetton Formula, and when Luciano cleared out the management in 1990 our hero became Managing Director.

That 1988 Adelaide race was interesting for a couple of F1 historical reasons. It was the last race of the turbo era, and McLaren achieved a 1 - 2 with Prost and Senna. Despite having scored less points across the season than Prost, Senna was declared World Champion because under the rules of that time only each driver's best 11 results counted towards the championship

It is axiomatic that good managers have a knack for recruiting the best people.

When our man Flavio became head of an F1 team, he had absolutely no background knowledge to lean on, so clearly he need experts to support him. In 1991 Briatore brought Tom Walkinshaw into Benetton as Engineering Director, and Ross Brawn as Technical Director.

Walkinshaw, who had very strong background as a race driver and team owner, was instrumental in bringing Michael Schumacher across from Jordan that same year. Rory Byrne was already in place at Benetton as designer, as was race engineer Nigel Stepney.

Flavio now had all the the pieces in place that would lead to Driver's World Championships in 1994 and 1995.

When Briatore took over at Benetton their engine supplier was Ford, and that remained the case until the end of the 1994 season. For 1995 F1 cars changed from V8 to V10 engines, and this was to prove fateful for Flavio, because it brought Renault into his life.

In 1995 Michael Schumacher won his second WDC with Benetton, which was now Renault-powered, and the team won its first and only Constructors Championship. But the good times were coming to a close, for at the end of the year Schumacher, Brawn, Byrne, and some other key figures departed for Ferrari.

Williams won the Constructors Championship in 1996 and 1997, with their drivers Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve winning the WDC for those years. Luciano Benetton put his son Rocco into the F1 team, and Benetton Junior fired Briatore.

The Engine Supplier

In a somewhat far-sighted move, Briatore had bought the Ligier F1 team in 1995. He promptly sold it on to Tom Walkinshaw, who renamed it TWR Arrows, but the clever Flavio had got what he wanted from the deal; Ligier's stock of Renault V10 engines.

As one consequence of being privatised, Renault announced that they would be withdrawing from their F1 engine supplier role at the end of 1997. The French company Mecachrome, who had prepared Renault engines for F1 customers, would continue to supply engines for 1998, but after that Benneton, Williams, Arrows, and BAR would be stuck for motive power.

Step forward Flavio Briatore, who happened to have some engines tucked away.

Briatore's company Super Performance Competition Engineering reached an agreement whereby Mechachrome would prepare the engines, and Flavio would distribute them under the Supertec name. How Rocco Benetton felt about having to buy engines from the guy he had fired is not publicly recorded.

The F1 Boss - Again

Renault returned to F1 in 2000 by buying the Benetton team, racing as Benetton-Renault in 2001 and Renault after that. They knew who they wanted to run the operation for them, and Flavio Briatore was back as Managing Director and Team Principal, displacing Rocco Benetton.

In 2001 English driver Jenson Button joined Renault on loan from Williams. Briatore was publicly scathing about Button, who was out-classed by his team-mate Giancarlo Fisichella, and said he would not keep him for 2002 if he had a choice.

Button was sacked at the end of 2002, replaced by young Spanish test driver Fernando Alonso. Alonso did not disappoint his boss. He won the WDC in 2005 and 2006, with Renault securing the constructors title in both years.

We are all too familiar with Alonso's torrid year at McLaren in 2007, during which time Renault and Briatore languished in the doldrums.

In the 2008 we saw Alonso chasing wins for Renault again. We also saw a strange crash in Singapore that has now led to Flavio's downfall, and perhaps this is really the end of his F1 career.

Or perhaps not.

Other Interests

Flavio Briatore has many interests outside of F1.

He owns a restaurant in London, a nightclub in Sardinia, a beach club in Tuscany, and a holiday resort in Kenya named The Colony Club.There is also his clothing brand Billionaire, and his fashion brand Billionaire Italia.

It goes without saying that he has a yacht, the 207 feet long Force Blue.

Briatore became chairman in 2007 of London soccer club Queens Park Rangers, which he co-owns with Bernie Ecclestone and Lacksmi Mittal.

So even without F1, Flavio has lots to occupy him. How his lovely wife Elisabetta Gregoraci will comfort him in these difficult times is something I cannot speculate on.

Why Do Women Like NASCAR?

Duncan Scott — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:34:00 -0400

Is it politically incorrect to say that men and women tend to have different interests?

Until recently, I held the view that motor sports were mainly for men. We are the ones with a natural interest in fast machinery, a love for the technicalities of engines and suspensions, an instinctive appreciation of a well-designed car.

The smell of race fuel and hot tyre rubber, the scream of a high-revving engine: These are delights for a man's senses—not for a woman to enjoy.

There have always been exceptions to the rule that motor racing is a man's sport, as there have always been ladies at races. Somebody has to go fetch the refreshments, now don't they?

It is said that confederate flags are more common than black faces at NASCAR events, but what most strikes me about the crowds is the number of women.

The most recent statistic I can find shows women to be 42 percent of NASCAR audiences, and that figure has grown from 31 percent over the last 10 years.

Make no mistake, 42 percent is a phenomenally high figure for a motor sport, and others would certainly like to hook so many women.

A strong female audience is very good news for a sports promoter. Advertisers like to see a good percentage of women because in addition to their personal spending on toiletries etc., they commonly have the final say on major household purchases.

So how has NASCAR lured so many girls?

I could put forward a theory that NASCAR is appealing to the girls precisely because it lacks the techno-geekery loved by F1 fans, who are never so happy as when discussing rear diffusers or some obscure regulation change.

Or is it the hunky and personable drivers, who certainly make better interviewees than F1's cautious speak-your-weight machines?

The only worthwhile answers can come from NASCAR's fan base, who know what they like and why they like it.

So what do you say?

The Bleacher Amateur Keyboard Club: Is It Ending?

Duncan Scott — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 06:46:59 -0400

If you have ever tried to get a book into print, you will know the writer's standing in the world of publishing. He or she is a humble supplicant, and is soon scarred by the lash of rejection.

For those with the right product at the right time, submitted to the right agent who has the right contacts with the right publisher, there can be a route to the sunny uplands of success.

For every smiling J.K. Rowling, however, there are thousands of disconsolate wannabes collecting rejection letters.

Dear _________ ,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript.

Unfortunately it is not what we are looking for at this time, so I can only thank you for your interest in our company and wish you success with your future endeavours.

Signed,

Emily Thurgood-Styles

Emily, it goes without saying, will not have glanced at your manuscript, or at any of the mass of unsolicited material landing on her desk.

Periodicals can be a slightly easier proposition, depending on their circulation. An article on the finer points of bee-keeping may find a welcome at the West Sussex Apiculture Gazette, and its 117 readers will surely be most interested.

Large-circulation magazines are a harder nut to crack, and an amateur is certain to find that their views on the development of haute couture will not be featured in the glossy pages of Vogue.

What it comes down to is that nobody has a divine right to be published.

Not you, not me, nobody.

Up until now, amateur sports writers have been able to publish freely on Bleacher Report. The premise of this article is that, quite inevitably, that era must come to an end.

Not so long ago Bleacher proclaimed itself to be the home of fan-journalism, and thousands of amateur writers seized the opportunity to put their words in front of their peers. But again and again we must learn that the past is another country, they do things differently there.

Now Bleacher is self-described as 'The Web's best destination for sports community, news, opinion, photos, and more.'

The site is becoming very commercial, oriented towards maximising ad revenues, and professional standards must be rolled out across all aspects of it.

Predicted Changes

At the moment a writer can upload any photo they choose to accompany an article, and do so with a cheerful disregard for copyright. There is a box to be ticked, signifying that the uploader has the legal right to use the photo, but that will not keep the lawyers at bay for one moment.

#1 Bleacher will have to remove the photo-uploading facility.

Presently a writer can put an article on the site with no immediate restrictions. It can contain obscenities, libels, malicious accusations, incitement to commit murder, encouragement of racial persecution or defence of the same, and it will be live on site and visible to millions until it is removed.

#2 Bleacher will have to vet all articles pre-publication, and purge the article archives using the same criteria.

Writers from all parts of the world have found expression here. In some cases pidgin-English articles have appeared that would be totally unacceptable in any professional publication.

#3 Bleacher will become a less-hospitable place for writers who do not have English as their first language.

The 'I think this and I think that' type of opinion piece is very engaging for small groups of argumentative people, but has little appeal to a wider public.

#4 Bleacher editorial content will become much more depersonalised reportage, with only selected columnists with the rare talent to do so voicing opinion. There will be no place for articles purporting to predict Bleacher's future.

One consequence of Bleacher imposing professional standards on writers will be that those whose writing is up to scratch, and who can reliably deliver copy ahead of deadline, will receive remuneration.

#5 Those who seek to finance a yacht from Bleacher earnings should probably turn their attention to dinghies.

The comment threads are sure to remain a vital feature of Bleacher report, where arguments will rage and personal vendettas will be pursued. After clicking the 'Like' button below, the comment box is awaiting your input.

F1 for Dummies (Or How to Save This Kitten)

Duncan Scott — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:59:10 -0400

I keep telling people I loathe Bleacher slide shows, so here I am with another one. My purpose today is to promote and explain the sport of F1, but I'm not going to tell you that F1 is better than NASCAR or IRL. Why would I do that? I am going tell you that F1 is a wonderfully simple sport to follow. How simple? The driver who finishes first in a race is the winner, if only NASCAR had such clarity. So having established that my purpose is to provide a brief guide to F1, it's time to go on with the show. Oh yes, the kitten. We will get to that cute little darling, I promise you.

Begin Slideshow

Attack Of The Quitting Zombies

Duncan Scott — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:59:30 -0400

I'm quitting Bleacher.

Actually I'm not, it just seems a popular thing to say at the moment. Everywhere I look on Bleacher somebody is making a dramatic announcement of departure, invariably at great length and with a deluded self-righteous pomposity.

I've got a good tip for farewell note writers; keep it short, people lose interest.

The obvious solution to the plethora of long goodbyes is to have an on-line form for the disgruntled, the despairing, and the defeated to complete.

----------------------------------- cut here ----------------------------------

I (insert name) am quitting Bleacher because:

Somebody made me cry
That big girl pulled my hair
Rotten Ronnie said a rude word
I'm an attention-seeking twat

(delete where inapplicable)

----------------------------------- cut here ----------------------------------

The departed would print the form and staple it to their forehead.

Look, let's be sensible about this.

If you want to write here, then write. If you want to leave, then leave, but don't expect anyone to care. Life isn't like that.

So goodbye, I'm missing you already.

There was no need to slam the door.

Twat: Noun

S: (n) fathead, goof, goofball, bozo, jackass, goose, cuckoo, twat, zany (a man who is a stupid incompetent fool)

KISS : Keep It Sexy, Stupid

Duncan Scott — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:42:51 -0400

Editors: This article has been edited numerous times.

Up until a couple of days ago the greatest number of reads scored by one of my Bleacher articles was 1,820. That was a piece on NASCAR, and I really think you should read it right now; you'll be so glad you did.

The lowest number of reads I've scored is 18, and my typical score is usually between 200-300.

For me, the whole point of writing is to be read. Does that make sense?

So I set out to write an article that would really rack up the numbers and get the counter spinning.

The Bleacher front page gave me the blueprint for a reader-magnet.

I had to produce a slide-show, and the subject matter had to be scantily-clad women. That conclusion will not surprise you, but it does puzzle me.

The Internet can be seen as an infinite universe of porn. Whatever your personal preferences, Google will swiftly find what you seek on your journey to the depths of depravity, no problem.

And as there is that readily available resource of heavy-duty porn, why should girlie photos be so popular on a sports site? Beats me buddy.

But I followed the recipe, and in no time at all, I had my new article ready. It wasn't quite what my title and photo suggested, but I only wanted to pull the readers in, not to give them visual Viagra.

I cannot remember the original name of article, because under the hand of various editors it has metamorphosed to the rather clumsy title Say Tease: Sexy Photos of Female Athletes in the Act.

The last time I looked, that article had pulled in 16,953 reads. Not a huge number by Bleacher standards, but vast to me.

Mission accomplished, but now I'm looking for bigger hits.

If you happen to be looking for me, I'll be scouring the Internet for some vaguely sports-related soft porn. That's what the public wants, and who am I to argue?

I William Shakespeare: With a Message to Editors

Duncan Scott — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:39:27 -0400

If I, William Shakespeare, write a seething melodrama concerning murder and ghosts, swordplay and poison, and I choose to call it 'Hamlet,' isn't that my privilege?

My title may say nothing about the nature of the play, but it's my play, and I'll title it as I please.

It may be that I've named the play after the leading character, it may be that I want to conceal the nature of the work so its content comes as something of a revelation to the audience. Whatever, the title in my business.

Not your business, my business.

I do hope you're nodding in agreement.

In 16th century England, a writer was allowed to title his works, but if he wrote today on Bleacher he would have a tougher time. Some pimply co-ed from Biloxi, MS would change 'Hamlet' to 'Death In Denmark', and if he undid the damage another cretin would come along and change it to 'Treason In Tights'.

Don't tell me about Bleacher guidelines or Google searches; your protestations meet with my supreme indifference and scorn.

I want to put my own title to my own work, got that?

Now here's a little exercise, something to do while your pimple ointment is drying.

Watch this Hamlet-themed TV commercial.

Now think of a good title, write it on a postcard, and mail it to yourself. Because I'm not interested.

Say Tease: Sexy Photos of Female Athletes in the Act

Duncan Scott — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 04:59:34 -0400

I might be a slow learner, but I get there in the end. Intense study, whole minutes of it, has taught me that, to paraphrase H.L.Mencken, nobody ever lost readers by underestimating the taste of the Bleacher public. To rephrase that, the customer is always right, and Bleacher readers do seem to like slide-shows. And hot babes. Titillation is very popular, my friends, and how does that word begin? Say it loud, say it slow, you'll feel all the better for it. And if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Here we go then, on Scott's sleazy slide-show. Starting on Suggestive Street, we will visit Cleavage Canyon, Bra-Strap Boulevard, Pantie Place, and other dream locations. For our first call, we see a study titled 'Russian With Fruit'. Women - mouth - banana. Let your imaginations run wild boys, she only does it to tease you.

Begin Slideshow

F1 Turbulence: Dumbing It Down

Duncan Scott — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 07:54:23 -0400

My young Bleacher colleague Michael Griffin recently published an interesting article on F1 aerodynamics in which he considered the airflow over, under, and around the car.

The nett effect of the aero design features is of course that the car completes a lap quicker. This is very evident when you compare lap times on the same circuit between F1 cars and other vehicles with a similar top speed but little or no aero downforce.

OK, racing is about speed, but one man's meat is another man's poison.

When the low-pressure high-speed and high-pressure low-speed airflows so well explained by Michael come together behind the car, a region of extremely turbulent air is created.

The following car is badly affected by that turbulence because there is no clean air to flow in a smooth laminar fashion over its aero surfaces, so it loses downforce. It cannot put power down as effectively, and it loses track adhesion, so overtaking becomes almost impossible.

Turbulent wake is also a lethal problem in aviation. Aircraft have crashed when the turbulent wake of a preceding plane has robbed their wings of uplift. Only laminar flow over the wings keeps you aloft when flying, without it you are shattered bones and torn flesh, only the teddy bear will survive intact.

The FIA came up with a proposal to address the turbulent wake issue back in 2005, this was the Centreline Downwash Generating Wing as shown below.

Below is a graphic showing the predicted effect of the CDG wing as visualised by the computing power of AMD.

In the above graphic, red is good wholesome air, yellow is not so good, green is fairly useless for aero purposes, and blue is the bad-arsed air that is no good to man or beast.

The teams agreed to consider the CDG wing, but then rejected it. For the large rear wings we are so familiar with don't only generate downforce, they generated big-time sponsorship money.

If you are putting your company's money into F1, that rear wing is the prime place to have your advertising, it is the Times Square of F1. Your company's name will not have the same impact when split across the two parts of a CDG wing.

With the CDG concept scrapped, a Overtaking Working Group was set up. A group of engineers was supposed to consider means of improving overtaking opportunities in F1, but as there was no possibility they would be allowed to scrap the advertising hoarding fastened to the back of every car, the whole thing was really a farce.

The engineers sat around and said "blah blah blah" quite a lot, then they agreed to make some minor changes that would not improve overtaking opportunities and would not threaten advertising opportunities.

And that is where we are.

Racing without overtaking is a procession, a dull and pitiful thing. F1 is styled as the pinnacle of motor sport, and certainly it is the most expensive.

I contend, however, that F1 is far from being the pinnacle of motor sport entertainment, and I am sure any NASCAR, Superbikes, WTCC, MotoGP etc fan will agree with me on that point.

No minor tweaks can rescue F1, and no changes of personnel at the top. What is needed is a root-and-branch clear-out, transforming Formula Bore into Formula Scott.

Formula Scott

Aerofoils to be banned from F1.
Team income from TV rights to be increased, current commercial deal scrapped.
Refuelling banned, yes I know that's already scheduled.
Races to be 60 minutes maximum.
Free choice of tyre supplier.
Electronic aids such as traction control allowed.
Circuits given percentage of TV money.
Venues extended to include USA and Canada.
Lapped cars to be black flagged.
Hermann Tilke declared persona non grata.

That'll do to start with. What do you think of it so far?

Sunday Motorsport And A Death: RIP Henry Surtees

Duncan Scott — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:25:23 -0400

This is not the article I started to write.

Sunday came rolling around again, and there was much for me to do. The lawns need cutting, the trees are crying out to be trimmed, and I haven't finished the guttering refurbishment I started weeks ago.

Sunday is also a great day for motorsport, so I gave that priority. On TV there was F2, 125cc bikes, WTCC cars, and the MotoGP I was really looking forward to.

This evening I settled down to write an account of a couch-potato's motorsport Sunday, and my impressions of the various racing formats I had seen, especially the superb MotoGP.

Remembering that earlier on I had seen a young F2 racer named Henry Surtees, I idly wondered if he might be a relative of John Surtees the great motorcycle champion and 1964 F1 champion, maybe a grandson.

The Internet knows everything, and reading Henry Surtees' entry in Wikipedia I was amazed to discover that he was in fact John's son. Yup, John born in 1934 had a son born in 1991.

I found a photo of John and Henry Surtees, and you see it above.

Minutes later, when I went back to Henry's page on Wikipedia it had been amended to show him as having died on July 19th, 2009.

I was dumbstruck and horrified, and immediately checked some news sites to ensure a cruel hoax had not been played.

It was all too true. Henry was struck by a wheel that had become detached from the car of Jack Clarke, and he died later from his injuries. How often have we seen rogue wheels in F1?

Always when there is a fatality in motor racing I briefly feel guilty that someone has died to entertain me. Really I know that they died because they loved racing, and they needed to win.

Still this has stabbed me, and I will see Henry Surtees' smiling young face for a long time.

My very sincere condolences to the Surtees family, I just don't know what else to say when someone has lost a son at 19-years-old.

Killing Horses: What Wonderful Sport

Duncan Scott — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:03:27 -0400

Do you like to see horses beaten with whips?

Does it please you to hear them scream when their legs are broken?

When they are destroyed do you feel some pleasure?

If you can answer Yes to any of the above questions then horse racing is the sport for you.

On the other hand, if you tend to answer No to all three you might perhaps agree with me that horse racing is no more a sport than bear-baiting or dog-fighting, both of which are illegal in all civilised countries.

For if it is depraved to deliberately cause suffering to a bear, or a dog, or a human being, how can it be acceptable to thrash a horse in order to make it run faster? To force it to jump high fences, knowing how frequently that causes agonising injuries that will result in the animal's death?

Here are just a few of the many horses killed by the UK racing industry so far in 2009.

Pride Of Northcare collapsed and died after a race at Southwell.
Farmers Lad fell and broke its neck in a race at Newbury.
Endless Power suffered a broken pelvis during a race at Kempton Park and died during the following night.
Kings Quay broke a leg during a race at Uttoxeter and was destroyed.

See this campaign website for a distressingly long list of deliberate cruelties inflicted in the name of sport.

Horse racing in the UK is just one part of worldwide network, all of it inextricably linked to gambling, with all its attendant crime and corruption.

Surely sport should be about human endeavour, is it possible to gainsay that?

That human endeavour can be a noble, inspiring, and entertaining thing. There's no need for animals to suffer, not in the name of sport.

Drugs In Sport: The Unwinnable War?

Duncan Scott — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 19:23:03 -0400

One of my early Bleacher articles was about Tommy Simpson, an English professional cyclist who died while competing in the Tour de France, and who was found to have taken banned amphetamines.

I had starting researching Simpson's death with the belief that he was a druggie and a fool, who had knowingly pedaled to his early death. But I finished feeling very sympathetic to him, and confused about my views on drugs in sport.

The confusing question I could not answer was this; If an athlete knows he cannot reach the top of his sport without using drugs, is he a hero or a fool to spurn them?

In some ways my question is naive, for in many sports the athlete will know from the very outset, before they have reached the first rung of the competitive ladder, that they are committing to a sports career based on drug use.

Few could look at modern bodybuilders, men and women, and believe that such development is possible by entirely natural means; by pumping iron and eating food supplements. It is widely recognized that steroid use is rampant, and it is easy to find photos on the web showing the extreme effects.

I started this article with a reference to Tommy Simpson and the Tour de France.

In the years since Simpson's death there have been many drugs scandals in professional cycling. Entire teams have been wiped out of the sport, and its very existence has been seriously threatened.

Of course regulatory bodies have taken steps to counter drug use, including blood doping. Unfortunately, they have never been able to permanently get one step ahead of the athletes, who are advised by doctors just as expert as those working to enforce the rules.

New tests are developed and new masking techniques are brought in to fool the testers. It is an endless cycle, and one that appears to be just as futile as the law enforcement effort against illegal drugs in western countries.

I don't know how many billions have been spent on trying to halt the flow of illegal drugs to countries such as the U.S. and U.K., but I do know the drugs are still coming. Even the remote rural area of Scotland where I live has drug users, and they seem to have no difficulty obtaining supplies.

What chance then do sports authorities have against drugs use when all the resources of state law enforcement, and all the might and majesty of the judicial system are ineffective?

Every time I hear of an athlete being disqualified for failing a drugs test, my thought is that he or she is an unlucky one. If, for example, a 100m sprinter fails a test, is it remotely conceivable that their coach/manager/teammates were unaware of drugs being used?

It seems more likely to me that that the testing regime is catching a few people, but that those who slip past the tests are still facing the Simpson question, to continue with chemical performance enhancement or to fade from the pinnacle of their sport.

If the war on drugs cannot be won, perhaps it is time to call a halt to it, and to at last bring things out into the open and let athletes make an honest choice.

That could be seen as a surrender to cheating, or a recognition of reality.

You tell me.

Some Top Sports Bores

Duncan Scott — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:34:47 -0400

What is sport? I do not have the language skills to define it, but if I made the attempt I would tend to include the words 'competitive' and 'unpredictable'. In a true sporting contest Jack can defeat Giant, there are no certainties. When considering professional sport I would add the word 'entertaining', for why should anyone pay to be bored? We can follow politics and be bored for free. So, I'm going to kick off this slide-show of sports bores with Venus and Serena Williams, the slog sisters. They turn up at Wimbledon, and one of them wins the ladies singles championship, then they jointly win the ladies doubles championship. They've been around a long, long time, there is an element of tedium creeping in. So I suggest they move on now, perhaps to form a mud-wrestling tag team.

Begin Slideshow

Will America Love US GP?

Duncan Scott — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 07:15:38 -0400

Next year something special will happen.

2010 will be the Chinese year of the tiger, the British year of a long-awaited general election, the deadline for the withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraq, the official end of the space shuttle programme—golly gosh, all kinds of things will be happening.

But for those enthralled by the scream of racing engines, 2010 will be marked by a very significant event indeed, the first ever US Formula One team will kick their tires and light their fires to compete for glory in the world's most glamorous and expensive sport.

The US does have a long history of involvement in F1.

Ford is an American company, and have run F1 teams in the past, but always very much as subsidiaries based overseas. The US has also produced two F1 World Champions, which may not sound many, but you may be surprised to know it is twice as many as Germany.

Next year US GP will compete in F1 as a US-based and US-owned team, they will be Team America without the puppet sex.

For US GP to survive and thrive, they need two things to happen.

They need to be good enough to not look foolish, and they need home support, a mass of US viewers tuning in and turning on to watch the races. Without that home support they will not attract and retain sponsors, and without sponsors they will wither and die.

Now I don't want US GP to wither and die, because I sincerely believe F1 needs more involvement by the world's No. 1 economic and technological country, so I am counting on the US public to lift your one and only F1 team to the heights. Can you do it? Yes you can.

That does not mean NASCAR fans - and let me say a big hello to Kelly, Jen, and Mary Jo—need abandon the four-wheeled love of their lives. US F1 will be a plus, and will take nothing away. You can still enjoy your space-frame non-stock cars powered by antiquated engines racing around oval tracks. And around and around and around.

Just kidding, I'm not really knocking NASCAR. I used to own a racing oval, although I was only ten years old. As NASCAR is based in the bible-belt, I refer you to Corinthians 13:11.

US GP will fly the stars and stripes at race tracks globally, watched by countless millions of viewers. It will be a real big shame if America does not support them.

It's Time To Be Nauty Again: Have You Seen This Geek?

Duncan Scott — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:10:17 -0400

The F1 section of Bleacher Report is not exactly thriving.

Agreed?

We lack zest, spit and vinegar, reckless enthusiasm, silly humour, shameless self-promotion and many other things. We don't have enough articles that intrigue, stimulate, infuriate, and otherwise engage the reader.

In other words, we lack Ben Auty.

Ben has been AWOL for a long time, but I was reminded of him by this Auntie Sara article. Sure we have some good writers, but not enough, and I write that without disrespecting anyone but myself.

There is a vicious circle whereby a good article will attract good numbers of readers, and many will feel motivated to reply, thus attracting other comments, and ad (almost) infinitum. Site traffic increases, more writers join, Nirvana is within our grasp.

Ben Auty wrote that sort of golden article, rightly does Sara call him the Midas man.

10 Astounding Autyisms

The weight of 1 NASCAR Winston Cup Tyre is equivalent to the weight of 368 Human Eyeballs.
An F1 car is made up of over 80,000 individual parts, if the car is assembled 99.9 percent correctly it would still have 80 things wrong with it.
Thanks for your great comment Ben, I agree with you completely ! But of course I would ! Ha ha ha ... Muppet !(replying to one of his own comments)
Some say, that when training at the gym, instead of energy drinks, he chugs down diesel, and instead of a pedometer being attached to the waistband of his shorts, he has a speedometer, all we know is, that he’s called Ben Auty.
This just might be the greatest article you will ever read on Bleacher Report. Yes, it's true, even if I do say so myself.
NOTE TO READER—Prepare to be very freaked out by my findings.
Moving on, I am sure you all know how much of a McLaren fan I am. Not wanting to rub salt in the wound, but Ferrari, ha ha ha ha ha, good try boys. It was a comedy of errors for the boys in red again.
If you like what you have read then go back to the top of the page, present me with five stars and a lovely pick of the day award. If you don’t like it then feel free to leave me lots of negative comments (I am guessing that these will come from the Ferrari fans?)
The story starts with a Kiwi, no not the fruit, the people who are born in New Zealand.
Throw some answers at me, let’s kick off a big debate, lets score this article with lots of five out of five’s and shall we make it pick of the day? Yes, why not...

Goddam it Ben, wherever you are, and whatever you are doing, get yourself back here. Lewis is climbing up the grid, McLaren are coming back to crush the upstarts, soon it will be Ferrari-mocking time, and nobody ever did it like you.

Over and out, Duncan.

I swear to hunt down and destroy any editor who changes my title.

Not the Formula One News

Duncan Scott — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:46:59 -0400

There have been all sorts of F1 stories in the news recently, here is a summary:

FOTA split with the FIA.
FOTA kissed and made up with the FIA; both parties swore undying love.
FOTA said they had won and gone back to the FIA on their terms, which included Max Mosley shutting up and going away.
Max Mosley got annoyed at FOTA claiming their victory was a win, or that their win was a victory, and thus he was no longer sure about shutting up and going away.
Bernie Ecclestone said some kind things about the late Herr Hitler. He also said that Max Mosley could run Britain better than anyone else.
I said my dog could run Britain better than the current prime minister. Or Max Mosley.
Bernie Ecclestone retracted the kind things he said about the late Herr Hitler, but made no mention of my dog.
FOTA and the FIA had a technical meeting that was abandoned when fighting broke out.

This is such an exciting sport, quite incomparable.

Every time I see Max on TV I can't help wondering if he has a plaster on his butt due to the exertions of Madam Whiplash. Bernie always makes me think that while elderly poor people get dementia, elderly rich people merely become more eccentric.

Strange to say, though, the news cycle is about to be interrupted by a racing event, what F1 enthusiasts call a Grand Prix. The world has turned many times since we last saw such a thing, it was at the Silverstone circuit in England.

Silverstone was jam-packed with race fans for three days, as it always is for the British Grand Prix. In fact, the event is such a success at Silverstone it is being moved to another circuit, there's just the small matter of building the facilities at Donnington Park.

The fans don't want the move, the teams don't want the move, the drivers don't want the move. One man wants the move, an elderly eccentric who has the only opinion that seems to count for anything.

There is nothing so uncommon as common sense, and it does not exist in F1.

Still, there's an F1 race on Sunday, and better than that, qualifying the day before. Which is Saturday, to save you looking at a calendar. Because the qualifying period tends to be infinitely more entertaining than the race, and is likely to show which will be the three drivers grinning on the podium, it is probably more deserving of time in your TV schedule.

On race day, the driver who was fastest in qualifying (his name will be Jenson or Sebastian) will first lead the field in a parade lap. When the race is started, that driver will then the field for the first lap, the second lap, the third lap, and so on until the race finishes about two hours later.

Alternatively, you could spend your Sunday afternoon on holocaust studies, or on watching paint dry.

Now look, I would love to have written about how F1 is so competitive that anybody could win on Sunday. I would have been pleased to tell you that the sport is at least as exciting as MotoGP, and that the drivers are devil-may-care heroes who will risk everything to pull off a sensational overtake.

But that's not the F1 news.

Fuji, Toyota, and the Future of Formula One

Duncan Scott — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:41:48 -0400

Autosport is reporting that the Fuji International Speedway will no longer host F1 after 2010 due to financial considerations. Read the whole story here, there would be no point in me plagiarizing it. Not that I would do such a thing, of course.

There are two aspects of the story that grab my attention.

The first is that Toyota owns the circuit, so its decision to pull the plug may give us a hint about the future of its F1 team. The company appears to be in a phase of heavy losses.

How can Toyota justify to its owners and workforce a continued investment in F1 racing, especially when they are not scoring wins and do not seem likely to?

I don't think they can and therefore I expect an announcement in due course.

The second aspect is the relevance to F1's current financial arrangements.

In normal business transactions, a venue makes a deal with an event promoter whereby revenues are shared on some equitable basis. That applies to all types of events from rock concerts to motor races.

The sources of revenue are mainly from tickets sold, television coverage, and stadium advertising, with a lesser stream from catering, franchises, etc. If the event is a big success, both partners make money, but if it flops they are both out of pocket.

Under the guidance of Bernie Ecclestone, F1 has a different financial model.

In F1 the venue has to pay Bernie's companies for the privilege of staging an F1 event. Various sums have been reported, but I believe it costs at least $20M. If not a single spectator paid for a ticket, the venue would still have to pay that fee.

Every penny of the income from television coverage goes to Ecclestone's companies, as does the money earned from track-side advertising. The venue's only significant revenue is from ticket sales, and that is precisely why Toyota is losing money on F1 at Fuji.

The venue has to sell all the tickets, and the tickets have to be expensive for the venue have a chance of breaking even. Bernie cannot lose; welcome to his world.

I suspect that Silverstone made a profit on the British GP, because the country has vast numbers of race fans who can pay the high ticket prices. Other venues, such as Istanbul, where the spectators are outnumbered by stray dogs, cannot possibly be profitable.

As the global recession bites deeper, and as business executives and politicians have to make tough choices, I harbor hopes that the whole dubious financial structure of F1 will come crashing down, and that a more equitable system will emerge.

Tickets at prices local people can afford, a fair share of television money for venues and teams—well, a man can dream.

F1 Death By Boredom: Bury My Heart At Laguna Seca

Duncan Scott — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 07:56:14 -0400

Most of us who write in Bleacher's F1 section have had something to say about Max Mosley. He is a big figure on our landscape, and I'm sure he would not object to me saying he has often been controversial.

However, none of us would use the terms this blogger employs. Warning: Strong language, may cause shock, palpitations, or sudden hair loss. It made me giggle though.

On the numerous F1 websites, and in the F1 print media, all talk is of Max and Bernie, of power struggles and bitter management rivalries. Of course it is, there's bugger-all else happening in F1.

I ask you, what kind of sport has a three-week break during the season?

Tennis fans get to see their heroes in action quite frequently. Soccer provides huge number of matches, but F1 has its supporters on iron rations.

And when we do experience the occasional F1 Grand Prix, it's almost invariably a dull procession in which the first three drivers on the grid circumnavigate the track for a tedious two hours before standing briefly on the podium. After that they can go off and have some fun, perhaps hire some naked girls to count their money.

Because F1 has been letting me down so badly I have been turning more and more to other sports, and to Moto GP in particular. Now that is racing, that is real motor sport, and the contestants are not the effete posers we see in F1.

When a Moto GP racer gets thrown off his machine at immense speed he hurls through the air like a rag doll, strikes the ground, and rolls for a few hundred yards. Is he then helicoptered to a medical centre for tea and sympathy? No sir, he is chucked into the back of a golf cart and taken to his garage to collect a spare machine.

Who runs Moto GP? I don't know, and I don't care. Of course I could easily look it up, but I don't care to, because it is a sport that delivers engrossing races every time out, and any backroom machinations are of no interest.

So later on I'll put a (vegetarian) pizza in the oven, and settle down to watch the Moto GP race at Laguna Seca. Now that is a race track, Bernie would hate it.

It is an absolute certainty that the race will be full of heart-in-the-mouth action. Young racers with incredible courage will lean their motorcycles over at 170MPH as they battle for track position, and quite possibly the excitement will cause me to choke on my pizza.

Choking is not the only hazard I will face. The pizza will be loaded with fat and cholesterol, but so what if it kills me? At least I'll die happy.

Bleacher's Top Sport: The Crying Game

Duncan Scott — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 03:26:11 -0400

Are you the kind of low-brow who watches talent shows like America/Britain/Somewhere's Got Talent?

No, neither am I, but my wife loves them, and am I not her lifelong companion?

Those shows are ubiquitous, every country has them. They hold out the glittering prize of fame and fortune, but wherever you are in the world, and whatever the name of the show, you may be sure Simon Cowell and/or Simon Fuller will be the real winners, making the real money.

Amongst the contestants will always be a singer who's not too good at singing.

OK, there are plenty of lousy singers in the world, but this guy knows there's a surefire way past the judges, the old sob-story routine.

There are variations, but here is the template.

"A few months ago my wife passed away, and I just want to sing for her up in heaven, and to make things better for our little girl, who's blind and in a wheelchair."

You've heard it—or something like it—I'm sure you have.

At least one of the judges will be wiping away a tear at this point, and our cunning contestant knows he's cleared the first hurdle with consummate ease.

When he gets to the live shows, the contestant will continue to pluck clumsily at heartstrings, and the producers will encourage him. There will be some coached emotion and choking back of tears during the performance, and some rehearsed lip-quivering when the guy is interviewed, all part of his pitch for the sympathy vote.

Pick up the phone, pick up the phone! Make someone named Simon a little richer.

Anyway, that's my rant about talent shows, and I must have needed to get it off my chest. Now I feel a whole lot better, but I really do have a Bleacher point to make here, honest guv'nor, and it is that the same shameless appeal to maudlin sentimentality is made here over and again.

I started to write this article with a list of offending articles ready to paste in, but now think that would be a mistake. You know the sort of thing I mean; how baseball brings me closer to my (dead) dad, catching with my (dead) grandfather's glove. Aaarrgggh.

Baseball features heavily in the morbid drivel arena; I blame Kevin Costner.

The writers involved seem to have the same strategy as the untalented talent show contestants. If you wear your heart on your sleeve, nobody will attack you, and you can make a full-on pitch for the sympathy comments.

And there is worse, there is much worse.

There are many thousands of Bleacher writers, and fortunately most have enough taste and decency not to parade their private sorrows here. The pain of loss should not be something to be flaunted in public, least of all on a sports site.

Let's have some pride, let's have some dignity. Let's have some self-respect, let's do our crying in the rain and our grieving in private.

Sport is one of the celebrations of life, and I for one don't come hear to read sob-stories.

My title photo shows pop singer and X-Factor (like American Idol) judge Cheryl Cole weeping as she hears a contestant's sob-story. Her fellow judge Simon Cowell cried all the way to the bank.

FOTA's Broken Arrow: The Beast Lives

Duncan Scott — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 07:20:24 -0400

Throughout history, it has been commonplace for great battle victories to soon become hollow and meaningless, irrelevant to the final outcome.

In The Hundred Years War, the technological superiority of the English (actually Welsh) longbow enabled a succession of English kings to inflict massive defeats on much larger French armies. From Crécy to Agincourt, clouds of arrows wreaked terrible slaughter, ending the age of the mounted knight and the crossbow, but failing to force a decision in favour of the battle victors.

It would be possible to give numerous other examples of victories that proved illusory, but I seek only to make the point that people and causes never just give up when they lose a battle, and that brings me to the F1 war.

FOTA and the FIA met on the field of battle in Paris on June 23-24, 2009, the outcome being a crushing victory for FOTA.

Or was it?

Ostensibly, the war waged by FOTA was to seize control of a) the regulation of F1, and b) the commercial income of F1, from the FIA and FOM respectively. As a symbol of victory, they also wanted the FIA's commanding general sent into exile.

FOTA went into war with a weapon to which their enemies had no answer, the threat of a breakaway series.

With 80 percent of the teams and drivers in the FOTA ranks, the FIA was facing a golden arrow that their armour could not withstand. I have no doubt though, that Max and Bernie always understood FOTA's weakness; there was only one arrow.

FOTA fired their shot on June 19, announcing a breakaway series for 2010 onwards. The arrow was in the air, aimed with great power and accuracy at the hearts of Max and Bernie.

Without the FOTA members, the FIA would be governing a totally meaningless series of races between nobodies, and the commercial income that made Bernie a billionaire would dry up.

I have read a great deal of comment that was extremely hostile to the Max/Bernie axis of F1, but I have never seen any suggestion that either of the men is a fool.

The gang of two knew they could not let the arrow strike home, FOTA's baby could not be allowed to grow. With their ancient cunning they staged a meeting in Paris, attended by FOTA president Luca Di Montezemolo on behalf of the teams.

The perma-tanned Di Montezemolo held all the cards, and he needed to make no concessions whatsoever, for his opponents could verbally agree to anything he asked on the one condition that he agreed to end the breakaway series. For whatever Max and Bernie agreed to, they could always retract later, and let the issues then be buried in endless litigation.

Tragically for the sport, in my opinion, Di Montezemolo did agree to end the breakaway. Thus FOTA's arrow was plucked from the air and broken, never to be fired again. The new baby, less than a week old and not yet named, was suffocated.

And now it is all over; what is our peace dividend? The FIA bureaucracy still regulates F1. The FOM grip on F1's finances is unbroken. And Max departing? I wouldn't bother calling a taxi.

The king is dead, long live the king.

Appropriate to what we have seen over the last few days, I think, is a line from the rock song Hotel California: They stab it with their steely knives, but they just can't kill the beast.

Invisible Racing For 2010?

Duncan Scott — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:49:12 -0400

"Knock knock"

"Who's there?"

"It's the invisible man."

"Tell him I can't see him."

OK, so it's an old joke, and it never was awfully clever. What do you want on a dull Sunday afternoon?

Bear with me while I try to construct some relevance to F1.

I live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, often referred to as "the UK". My coverage of F1 is provided by the BBC, and a very good job they do of it, if I can ignore the incoherent gibbering of commentator Jonathon Legard, who tends to sound as if he has never seen a motor race before and has no idea what's happening.

The reason I watch F1 on BBC is that our national broadcaster has a contract with Formula One Administration. The essence of the contract is that in return for a payment of £30M per year FOA provide the BBC with their coverage of FIA F1 World Championship races.

Naturally, because they've got money to burn the BBC send a large team to every event. We get to see highly-paid experts like Martin Brundle and Eddie Jordan stand in the pit lane and voice their opinions, and there are brief interviews with drivers who say very little and team officials who say even less.

The real content of each programme is of course the race, and every shot we see of a car in motion on the track is from an FOA camera pointing where an FOA director instructs, every screaming gear change come via an FOA microphone.

If the group of FOTA rebels do break away, reject the federal authority of the FIA and form their own racing confederacy, will the BBC still be contracted to show us the official F1? Even if the whole thing is such a farce that not even the drivers will care who wins?

I've a horrible feeling that the BBC are indeed stuck with whatever show Max and friends can put on, and will be up to and including the year 2013. The same will apply to other broadcasters who have signed multi-year contracts with FOA.

It would seem likely that Formula not 1 would get some TV coverage, maybe edited highlights at 3am on Eurosport. That just is not the same as settling down in front of the TV around Sunday lunch time to watch a live event, and I will not bother to view a bunch of Mosley-favoured Cosworth-powered nobodies compete in a worthless series for an irrelevant championship.

So, you say, there's a new series next year? And all the top teams will be there? Tell them I can't see it.

F1 Zombies Fight The Forever War

Duncan Scott — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:34:11 -0400

I have a recurring nightmare. It does not invade my sleep, but visits me day after day in my waking hours, appearing on my TV screen, my computer display, and on the pages of print media.

In this nightmare, ancient faces from the dead past keep returning to fight and re-fight the battles of long ago. While the real world has seen the end of the cold war, and has endured the stink, smoke, and tears of many hot wars, the war to control F1 is endless.

Young men have grown very old fighting this war, and time has ravaged their features with lines and liver spots. Yet they stagger on, stiffly perhaps, as if directed by George A. Romero. Blindly, remorselessly, without any guiding lights of decency or shared values, they advance into each encounter with the soulless purpose of the reanimated dead.

Their direction, their motivation, comes from money and power, the mass and the energy of their universe, the yin and the yang.

Max Mosley is quite open and unabashed about being determined that power over F1 must rest in his wrinkled hands. The team owners and principals are equally sure that they should have supremacy. With more real power and money than any of them, the diminutive demon Bernie Ecclestone appears to take no sides, for cash-flow has no politics.

We look rather wearily at the current F1 budget cap dispute, because we've been here before, we've always been here.

There have been disputes over turbos, ground effects, all sorts of things. Each has never been more than a pretext for battle, and a weapon to be used. And we've seen boycotts and breakaway series, when all we ever wanted to see was our F1 racing.

Many F1 fans do seem to have swallowed Max Mosley's line that budget caps are essential to ensure a future for F1, and I find that curious. I know that a great many F1 followers are also interested in other sports like soccer, and will be aware that Real Madrid have just paid £56M to secure the services of Kaka.

Have FIFA stepped in to say that in the current financial climate football clubs must limit their expenditure? They have not, and for the very good reason that clubs are left to manage their own financial affairs. If a club goes bankrupt, as sometimes they do, then so be it, there are always others anxious to take their place.

Max Mosley knows that the same could apply to F1 teams. Indeed, in the recent past and under Mosley's rule, some teams have vanished for lack of funds. What we are seeing now is Max using the budget cap issue as a weapon in his war for complete control of F1.

In most sports, probably in all sports except F1, teams co-exist with their regulatory bodies, there is not a constant and open war between participants and rule-makers. Our sport could be like that, it really could.

F1 needs a Barack Obama moment, some sense that things could be different, and maybe even better. No doubt there would still be problems, but I would suffer the disappointment, if only I could have a few moments of hope, some relief from the sight of the same old zombies dominating the F1 landscape, fighting their forever war.

F1, Max Mosley, and the Beyoncé Factor

Duncan Scott — Thu, 21 May 2009 09:44:50 -0400

Max Mosley has experienced a strange surge of popularity as of late. That's odd, because for many years he has been the object of F1 fans' extreme distaste, and he has known it.

Here's what he said in a interview with The Scotsman newspaper on Apr. 6, 2008:

"There are times when I'm utterly fed up. The other day I was reading a book called The Wisdom Of Crowds and it got me thinking: if all these thousands of people keep saying I'm a tosser, maybe they're actually right?"

Maybe they were right, in fact I'm sure they were, but now there has been a mood shift.

Everywhere I look I see articles agreeing with the FIA President that F1 budget caps are an immediate necessity that must be introduced for the 2010 season to ensure the sport's survival. I don't believe any such thing, but that's not the thrust of this piece.

Forcing Mosley's cap ideas has alienated some big F1 players. Most famously, Ferrari are outraged, but Renault, Toyota, and Red Bull are also dissident.

That's fine, sing Mosley's choir. If those old stick-in-the-muds can't face up to change they can be replaced with newcomers like Formtech, Epsilon Euskadi, and Campos.

Formtech? Epsilon Euskadi? Is somebody kidding me?

Does anybody on this planet think that Ferrari, Renault, etc. can be replaced by that shower? Do they believe Mercedes would stick around to compete against nobodies?

When a concert promoter can't book Beyoncé, he doesn't just put his Auntie Myrtle on the stage. He needs someone of equal stature or he won't be selling any tickets.

In the same way, F1 is an entertainment sport, and to pull in the mass global audiences it needs the Beyoncé factor, it needs class and glamour, and it needs world-recognised brand names.

Of course there are petrol heads who would watch any motor racing. You could put lawnmowers on the grid and still have avid fans discussing the race prospects. But they are not numerous enough to attract big-money sponsors or to make it worthwhile for TV companies to schedule coverage time.

Mosley is a much more clever man than me. That's why he's rich and I'm not. So he must know that a cut-price F1 consisting of the hapless racing of the hopeless would not be a major series.

But he has his own priorities.

My belief is that we are seeing a simple, old-fashioned power struggle that has very little bearing on the budget cap issue and everything to do with who calls the shots in F1, the teams or the FIA.

The truth could be that Mosley would rather see F1 as an Auntie Myrtle show under his control than as a Beyoncé mega concert controlled by somebody else. This is just my view, other opinions may be available.

F1 in the Eternal City

Duncan Scott — Sun, 17 May 2009 04:43:36 -0400

With all the hoo-ha about the latest spat between the FIA and some of the F1 teams, some deserving news items have slipped under the radar. In particular, there has not been much attention paid to Rome's $260M plans to stage a Grand Prix. I think that's a pity. True city circuits, and here one must exclude the hideous Valencia course and the dark vileness of Singapore, are F1's greatest spectacle. And what could be finer than F1's gladiators matching their machines with the Colliseum as a backdrop?

Begin Slideshow

The F1 Title: They Think It's All Over

Duncan Scott — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:59:37 -0400

Here we are then, five races into an F1 season of seventeen, and Jensen Button has a commanding lead over the rest of the pack. It seems unlikely now that anyone will be able to overtake him.

Or so I keep reading and hearing; they think it's all over, but it ain't.

Brawn GP under the redoubtable Ross Brawn have certainly put an ace car on the track, that is undeniable, and even I have to believe it. It is also self-evident that Button has driven superbly and consistently.

Yet there is more to scoring wins than driving ability, there is more than having a good car, there is more than having probably the best ever F1 strategist on your side. It helps to have a bit of luck, it is marvellous when the fickle finger of fate deflects the dagger from your throat.

I am warming to this notion now, so please bear with me while I stray into the twilight zone and outline an alternate reality to you.

Do you remember the Melbourne race? Lewis Hamilton does, but forget him for now. You will surely recall that Sebastian Vettel was looking good for 2nd or 3rd place until he had contact with Robert Kubica and was out of the race due to his car being in numerous pieces.

Undo that reality, and give Vettel the 3rd place. Score: Button 10 points, Vettel 6 points.

Due to the stewards foolishness (IMHO), Vettel was relegated down to 13th on the Malaysia grid as a penalty for the Melbourne prang; stewards don't want to see drivers fighting for places, it's not gentlemanly. From the 3rd position he qualified in he would have been a strong bet for a win, given that he was running longer than the Brawns, but I'll compromise and settle for 2nd when the race was stopped.

Score now: Button 15 points, Vettel 10 points.

On then to China. Here Vettel got his first Red Bull win and Button was 3rd, in fact and in my little fantasy. Score now: Button 21 points, Vettel 20 points.

In Bahrain Vettel was clearly quicker than Button, but qualified 3rd due to a silly fuel load, and finished 2nd. Undo that reality, give Christian Horner a brain-transplant, and we see the top two reversed.

Score now: Button 29 points, Vettel 30 points.

In Spain the Red Bull was again quicker than the Brawn, but again Horner snatched defeat from victory by burdening Vettel with enough fuel to drive home to Germany. For the purposes of my alternative and entirely reasonable reality, replace Horner with someone who knows what they're doing, and we see Vettel leading Webber at the finish, with Button limping home 3rd.

Score now: Button 35 points, Vettel 40 points.

In the real world, Button has 41 points to Vettel's 23. But just as the first five races could easily have led to Button not being the current front-runner, so the next five could see the wheel of fortune turn in Vettel's favour.

Young Seb has the car, and he has the talent. If only Red Bull designer Adrian Newey's genius was complemented by strategic thinking of the calibre Ross Brawn provides for Button, then we would see a fight for the title, and nobody would be thinking it's all over.

Fools Give You Reasons: Lewis And I

Duncan Scott — Tue, 12 May 2009 06:09:32 -0400

Who is really impartial?

I claim to be a guy who enjoys competitive racing, a true F1 enthusiast who can appreciate all the talents, and get a real buzz out of seeing an exciting newcomer do well. It is an honest claim, and I would always rather see a battle on the track than anybody cruising to victory.

When I first watched F1 on TV it was in black and white, and I vividly remember hearing on the radio that Jim Clark had been killed. That gives an idea of how long I have been following the sport, and I'm still crazy, after all these years.

Rarely have I been influenced by a driver's nationality, and I believe that is true of most F1 fans, and most sports fans generally. We are not so dumb as to believe they are competing for flag and country, and there has to be something else about them that strikes a personal resonance with us, and makes us care if they win or lose.

The great and monstrously unsuccessful Jean Alesi was one of my favourites along the way, as was the tragic Jochen Rindt. For reasons unknown to me I never felt any connection to Brit drivers Nigel Mansell or Damon Hill, yet I thought I was seeing one of the greats emerge when Jacques Villeneuve came to F1.

I can't pick lottery numbers worth a damn, either.

In 2007 Lewis Hamilton arrived at McLaren. He had appeared occasionally on British TV, and I was aware of him narrowly winning the GP2 championship, but I did not take a lot of notice of him. As that season progressed, and Hammy made a big mark on the sport, I became caught up in the Lewis fever.

He irritated the hell out of me sometimes, but I loved his aggression, and his total refusal to acknowledge double world champion Fernando Alonso as top man in the team. Then, with an amazing debut season championship within his grasp, he fumbled it, he dropped the ball.

In 2008 the irritation was still there, and Lewis again gave us a roller-coaster ride, swinging between triumph and farce on his way to winning the championship under circumstances that nobody could have found satisfactory. Next year, I thought, we'll see a more mature Lewis Hamilton stamp his authority on the sport.

So 2009 came along, and my heart was torn by the liargate affair, but it soon healed, for I cannot base my opinion of anyone on one petty foolishness.

We have seen F1's other British driver scoop most of the prizes so far, while Lewis has been let down by poor car design. I do not begrudge Button his victories, he has had a long time waiting in the wings, but his smiling face on the podium does nothing for the F1 fire in my belly, and I do not know why that is.

At the Melbourne Grand Prix, ITV commentator Martin Brundle quoted someone in McLaren as saying "we will win in Spain."

McLaren did not win in Spain, as you probably know.

I like to imagine there was an impromptu race strategy meeting in the McLaren garage, at which Martin Whitmarsh said, "The car's really slow, so let's burden Lewis with a ton of fuel, so he can really chew hell out of his tyres."

Everybody nodded and agreed. "Yes boss, that's the sort of bone-headed idea Ron would have been proud of."

So Lewis continues to struggle with both a slow car and the traditional McLaren strategic ineptitude. I can wait, I will wait, and in the meantime I'll still enjoy F1, because it's not just about one man.

I do not assume that Lewis is the best driver in F1. Maybe Alonso is, maybe Vettel, and Massa has a good claim to that title. Yet my F1 heart is connected to Lewis, and I do not care why.

Oscar Hammerstein II wrote "Who can explain it? Who can tell you why? Fools give you reasons; Wise men never try.” True, Hammerstein was not writing about F1, but he could have been.

If McLaren can find a way through the forest they are lost in, what I want to see is a titanic Hamilton/Vettel battle in late 2009 or in 2010. That will be all my wishes come true, but I won't be impartial.

Jai ho, Lewis Hamilton, jai ho.

Baby Shumi And The Path To Glory: Part 2

Duncan Scott — Sat, 09 May 2009 19:15:12 -0400

This is the second article in a two-part series. The first is reprised below.

British F1 fans have a small army of F1 World Champions in the national pride locker, the Germans have only one. So it was probably inevitable that the German media would seize on Sebastian Vettel as heir-apparent to Michael Schumacher's crown, but I think it is unfair.

It is unfair because Vettel is an individual in his own right, and entitled to create his own legend, and also because the circumstances that enabled Schumacher to record seven World Championships are unlikely to be repeated. In any Shumacher/Vettel comparison, Sebastian is unlikely to ever match up, and neither is anyone else.

In writing the above I am not attempting to answer the 'who was the greatest F1 driver' question; I view it as unanswerable. But determining who was the most successful is a simple matter of consulting the cold and impartial statistics; they tell us that Schumacher scored the most poles, wins, and championships.

I do not think 'Baby Schumi' Sebastian Vettel will be able to bust the records set by his predecessor because the Schumacher-centred mini-team that moved from Benneton to Ferrari was a unique creation. It put MS is a position where he was able to deploy his undoubted talent as the team's undisputed top driver, with all effort focused on putting him in a position to achieve wins.

To be in a position to match Schumacher, Vettel would have to be in a similar position of being the spearpoint of a massively talented squad, and I just cannot see that situation arising again.

In this 2009 season the obvious obstacle to Vettel's ambitions is the Brawn GP pairing of Jenson Button and Rubens Barichello.

Barichello is a constant reminder that the Schumacher coterie permitted no in-team rivalries, only a supporting cast. Button is making a very strong thrust for the championship, but I have heard no suggestion that Barichello would not be allowed to score his own wins, and if he does so that would clearly undermine his team-mate's bid for glory.

Similarly, Vettel has been out-performing his team-mate, which is always a sure sign of quality. But the team seems to be genuinely even-handed between their drivers, and while that is very fair to Mark Webber, it could have consequences for Vettel's title ambitions this year.

My tentative conclusion at this stage of the season is that 2009 will not see Vettel crowned as champion; Brawn are still very quick and Ferrari's Massa is looking a real threat.

For 2010 and onwards, Vettel will surely still have to contend with Button, Massa, and (I strongly suspect) Alonso. Possibly BMW will get their act together, maybe Toyota will stick around and really start to deliver; those are big unknowns.

There could also be menacing newcomers, but there would be no point in me speculating about them.

As I consider the present and likely future F1 fields, I see one big rival to Sebastian Vettel.

Lewis Hamilton.Well hey, I said you might not agree with me.

Assuming that Mercedes stay in F1 with McLaren, and that the team does not melt-down in some horrendous scandal, Hamilton should be well-placed to succeed in the next few years. McLaren may loudly claim that they treat their drivers as equals, I do not believe them, and it is clear that nobody in F1 believes them.

As the focus of the second most experienced team in F1, Hamilton will benefit from what is a rare luxury in the sport, being undisputed top dog. While Ferrari and other teams throw two spears at the driver title, McLaren put all their muscle into launching Hamilton at the target. For precisely that reason, no other top driver would consider joining the team while Hamilton is there; the situation is self-sustaining.

McLaren are currently having a bad year. That means nothing, it happens to all top teams. When they recover, and they will recover, it is my hope and belief that we will see Sebastian Vettel and Lewis Hamilton as the two titans of the sport. When that happens, either Vettel will be the sole focus of his team's efforts, or he will be seriously disadvantaged.

However Vettel progresses, and I admit my record as a seer if not good, it can only be good for F1 to have this talented and likeable young driver in the sport. Expectation is a heavy burden to carry, yet I cannot doubt Vettel has the gifts to support it, and like every F1 fan I will be watching with great interest.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baby Schumi And The Path To Glory part 1

Considering the rave reviews and near-universal acclaim Sebastian Vettel attracts now, it is somewhat strange to reflect that less than two years ago BMW released him from his contract with them.

At that time, July 1997, BMW F1 boss Mario Thiessen said "....the current testing rules mean that he barely gets a chance to drive for us. Now he has been offered the opportunity to get inside a Toro Rosso cockpit. We have sponsored and coached Sebastian over a number of years. To place obstacles in his career path now would go against our concept of talent promotion."

Good call, Mario. You're a genius.

So Vettel replaced the sacked Scott Speed at Torro Rosso, his first drive for them being the Hungarian Grand Prix. The team had cruelly announced that Vettel would partner Sébastien Bourdais in 2008, leaving Tonio Luizzi to drive the last seven races of 2007 under sentence of departure.

For most of the final phase of the 1997 season, Luizzi pretty much kicked Vettel's arse. But when rain came to the Japanese Grand Prix the young German made his way up to fourth position before being taken out of the race by a collision with Mark Webber. And at the following race in China, Vettel finished fourth. In both of those races, Vettel had shown his special ability in the wet.

He was on his way.

The 2008 season started very badly for Vettel. A series of bumps and scrapes saw him fail to complete even the first lap in the opening three races. By Monaco, and again in wet conditions, he was able to finish a very respectable fifth, and went on to score his and Torro Rosso's first win in the rain at Monza.

Because he is a German driver who is particularly excellent in wet conditions, the German media have nicknamed Vettel 'Baby Schumi', because they see him as the heir to 'rainmaster' Michael Schumacher.

Vettel finished the 2008 season with 35 championship points, comprehensively defeating his team-mate Sébastien Bourdais, who scored an embarrassing 4 points.

When it was announced that Vettel would drive for Red Bull in 2009, many of us were concerned that it would not be a good career move for him. We need not have worried.

Having already scored a first and a second place in 2009, Sebastian Vettel is now very much a star. Barring some horrible calamity, he should be a star of the future as well, and with every chance of world championships to his name.

At the moment Vettel holds the records for being the youngest driver to score F1 points, the youngest to take pole position, and the youngest to win a grand prix. To grab Lewis Hamilton's record of being the youngest winner of the drivers' title he will have to win it in 2009 or 2010; to an outsider that looks far from impossible.

Who then, could stop Vettel becoming one of the greats, a multiple world champion?

In the next and final part of this article, to be published before the Spanish Grand Prix, I will be considering who might stand in Sebastian Vettel's path to glory.

You may not agree with me.

Who's Racing Who In F1?

Duncan Scott — Fri, 08 May 2009 12:34:02 -0400

When the Spanish Grand Prix at the Circuit de Catalunya finishes on Sunday 10th May we will be more than a quarter way through the 2009 season. That's the bad news.

On the other hand, the pot is still almost three-quarters full, and that's the good news.

And we have we F1 fans learnt so far this year?

The politics of the sport, the in-fighting, back-stabbing, and general dirty fighting for power has erupted on the grandest scale for more than 20 years, but that is not my concern today. Suffice it to say that I do not accept that the lunatics have taken over the asylum; they've been barricaded in the management office for decades.

Let's turn our innocent eyes to events on the track.

It seems possible to (very cautiously) say that overtaking has been more of a race feature this year. That is my subjective impression, I can offer no statistical backing for my contention.

There is one thing that keeps nagging at me when I watch a race. It's an old thought, really, but it is one that grows stronger, and shows every sign of becoming a certainty.

Who really won in Australia, Malaysia, and Bahrain? I know the record books will show those races as victories for Jenson Button, that's not my point. And who now would like to challenge Button for victories, and ultimately the championship? Obviously Sebastian Vettel would.

Or so we are meant to think, for the drivers are the human faces we can love or loathe, support or oppose.

My contention here is that there is no race between Button and Vettel, or between Hamiton and Massa, or between driver X and driver Y. Put Vettel or Hamilton or Massa or X or Y in the Brawn GP car and he would be leading the title race.

F1 is not a contest between drivers at all. It's a technical challenge faced by design teams, and thus we do not really see Vettel challenging Button, we see Adrian Newey's design team trying to catch up with Ross Brawn's.

If the issue is who can tweak the aerodynamics to shave a tenth of a second off a lap, have we reached the dead end of F1? Is the battle of wills and courage between men in barely under control cars a thing of the past?

Who's racing who, and why should I care who wins?