Most major motorsports series have now wrapped up their 2014 championships but we still have a few series remaining over the next few weeks. While there will be less action on tracks, this is one of my favorite times of the year. I love the time between Thanksgiving and New Years. I love visiting family, I love getting people Christmas gifts, I love driving around at night with my family looking at Christmas lights and of course, I love the meals. Who else can't wait until they are devouring turkey, stuffing and mashed potatoes that has been drowned by gravy? Let's not forget about a slice of pumpkin and apple pie for dessert. There might be a race at Interlagos this Sunday but I am looking forward more to Thursday afternoon.
A Matter of Consistency
With Formula One and NASCAR ending their seasons a week apart and seeing how their championship unfold in two completely different manners, I think about how consistency played a role in each outcome.
In NASCAR, not only did the driver who won the most races not win the title but there was a chance a driver that did not win one of NASCAR's 36 races could have been champion, despite the Chase being changed to emphasize winning. NASCAR Chairman Brian France responded to the possible scenario of a winless driver becoming champion by saying in any format it is possible for a driver to be champion without winning a race. He went on to say that he didn't want a system that ignored consistency and that is fair but what type of consistency are we talking about and for how long?
Ryan Newman had five top fives all year and finished second in the championship. Joey Logano won five races and finished fourth. Newman consistently brought the car home, finishing 35 of 36 races with 31 of those on the lead lap but he wasn't consistently at the front. His only sliver of consistency was during the Chase. Before the Chase, Newman had back-to-back top ten finishes only three times. In the Chase, he went on a run of five consecutive top ten finishes.
Compare that to Jeff Gordon who had ten instances of back-to-back top ten finishes in the first 26 races. In the final ten race, Gordon had six top ten finishes, same amount as Newman, expect his finishes were 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 10th to Newman's 8th, 6th, 7th, 5th, 3rd and 2nd. What took Gordon out of contention were his outliers. In the semifinal round, Gordon finished runner-up twice with the Texas fiasco having him come home in 29th. Think about that. Had the crew changed left side tires only after his spin, he probably stays on the lead lap and picks up at least another point or two, which would have been enough to advance to Homestead while Newman's championship hopes would have died in the Phoenix desert instead.
With everyone who starts a race in NASCAR receiving points, consistency is much harder to reward. Look at what happened at Kansas. Keselowski, Dale Earnhardt, Jr. and Jimmie Johnson all had tire failures ruin promising days while Matt Kenseth was average, justing riding around and coming home in 13th. Kenseth scored 31 points by just managing to bring the car while Keselowski, Earnhardt, Jr. and Johnson ended with nine, six and four points respectively because of something out of their controls. A massive outlier in NASCAR kills championships run and we saw that occur in this Chase.
It would have been one thing if Newman was consistently finishing second, third or fourth every week and just wasn't having luck getting into victory lane but that wasn't the case. Other than Talladega in October and the final race, Newman was never in contention for victory. But you can't hate on Newman, you have to hate the system. Newman didn't have to turn up the wick until the Chase when the field was leveled on points. If the system was set up to award consistency throughout all 36 races, not to just those who survived three segments of three race and was top finisher in the final race, Newman wouldn't have been in play for the title.
Then you have Formula One where Lewis Hamilton won the world championship after winning 11 of 19 races. Nico Rosberg, who won just under half the amount of races Hamilton won, could have won the world title and had that been the case, then consistency would have been the explanation as to why. Unlike Newman, who barely finished in the top five all season, Rosberg finished on the podium in 15 of 19 races. He finished in the points on 16 occasions. That is championship worthy consistency. You know who else was consistent this season? Fernando Alonso with 17 points paying finishes but he was no where near Hamilton and Rosberg because he continued finishing fourth, fifth and sixth.
It's ok to award consistency. It's what sets motorsports apart from other sports as most series determine their champions over an aggregate of all that has occurred over the course of a season. It's just a matter of what type of consistency is being award, those finishing at the front or those who merely finish.
If NASCAR wants to truly award consistency, they should take a page from Formula One's book and award those who consistently finish at the front, the drivers who are consistently in the top five and top ten.
Formula One's Open Class
Between the Brazilian and Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Bernie Ecclestone floated out an idea to boost the Formula One grid. As Ecclestone called "Super GP2" with a single-make car and an upgraded engine.
What Ecclestone got wrong was labelling it as "Super GP2" but the idea has some legs.
First, don't call it "Super GP2." Never call it "Super GP2." It sounds like you are merely taking inferior equipment and adding it to the back of the grid to inflate the amount of cars in the race.
Second, look at what MotoGP has done. Four years ago, MotoGP was in a tight situation. Kawasaki had left and Suzuki were leaving and their grid was under 20 entries for every round. They needed to do something and for 2012 they introduce Claiming Rule Teams to allow privateer teams to compete at lower costs. In it's first year of 2012, grid sizes were up. Come 2013, grid sizes were up again. This past season the CRTs were restructured into the "Open" class with all bikes in the class using the MotoGP ECU and identical software. Every MotoGP round this season saw at least two dozen bike entered and the "Open" class has developed into a competitive option for teams to compete against the factory and satellite teams.
Here would be my proposal for Formula One's "Open" class:
1. Have a spec-chassis that is approved by the FIA.
2. Allow each the "Open" class teams to be supplied by of of the current engine manufactures (Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda in 2016 after their one-year exclusivity with McLaren is up) and merely plop the engine into the spec-chassis.
3. However, each engine manufacture can only supply one team.
4. Require that the "Open" class teams field a driver that is 24 years of age or younger or has less than 60 starts to their name.
5. All aerodynamic development is done as a collaborative
In my mind, I see four privateer teams on the grid, giving young drivers a shot at Formula One with no pressure to develop them too quickly. Think about how quickly we see drivers bounced out of Formula One in recent years? Think about the drivers that didn't and still haven't got a shot?
If an "Open" class would boost the grid with affordably competitive cars for young drivers to break into Formula One, who would be against it? The last two GP2 champions couldn't get on the grid and it looks like the struggle won't be any easier for this year's champion Jolyon Palmer. Jaime Alguersuari was out of Formula One by the age of 21. Charles Pic was out of Formula One by the age of 23. Jean-Éric Vergne's Formula One career very well could be over and he is only 24. Same for Esteban Gutiérrez who is only 23 years old. Then there is Kevin Magnussen, who could be one and done from Formula One and he is 22 years old and scored a podium on debut.
Let's not forget to mention the likes of Alexander Rossi, Robin Frijns, Stoffel Vandoorne, Sam Bird, James Calado and Giedo van der Garde. All winners in junior formulas who appear to lose the game of musical chairs not because they aren't good enough but don't have the backing behind them like others.
It's all about Formula One embracing the idea rather than clutch to a system of what they believe they have to be. An "Open" class would create it's own problems in that the only way teams get paid is through the manufactures' championship and the only way to be eligible for the manufactures' championship is for a team to build their own car. An "Open" class would need to have it's own cash flow coming in separate from the manufactures. This is easier said than done especially seeing the struggles of the small teams to get enough pay. If they can't get enough, why would we expect "Open" class teams to experience anything different and who is to say it will be enough for a team to survive even with spec-chassis?
It's not a bulletproof plan but Formula One has to realize their current state and if they don't do something soon, it could be disastrous.
If Not Formula One...
If the smaller Formula One teams such as Lotus, Force India and Sauber do get squeezed out, there is always IndyCar. Sure, it's not as glitzy but it produces really good racing and it is much more affordable. These teams would probably enter and immediately compete for victories. Other than Penske and Ganassi, these three teams could probably beat every other team on the IndyCar grid as they would all have larger budgets that are still a fraction of what they are currently running at.
While the chassis will be the same for everyone, each team could develop their own aero kit. Wouldn't that be great? Talk about diversity. Instead of every Honda and every Chevrolet looking the same, you could have four or five aero kits to choose from. How great would that be?
Think about it. Lotus would get to return to IndyCar... again! Except this Lotus isn't crap and you could see the return of Lotus-Honda, just like the late-1980s with Ayrton Senna. Talk about nostalgia. This would be a great alternative option for Sauber. The money Marcus Ericsson and Felipe Nasr are bringing would go so much further in IndyCar. Plus, Swedes and Brazilians do well in IndyCar, see Kenny Bräck, Gil de Ferran, Tony Kanaan, Hélio Castroneves and so on. Force India's COO Otmar Szafnauer is an American. He would would easily get Force India up to snuff in IndyCar. Sergio Pérez would be a huge hit in the States. Plus, there are around three million Americans with Indian ancestry and this could be an audience drawn to the series with a team they have a connection with.
If Formula One is too expensive for these teams then IndyCar would be a good alternative.
Champions From the Weekend
Lewis Hamilton won his second World Drivers' Championship with victory at Abu Dhabi.
Alex Lynn clinched the GP3 championship before a race was even run from Abu Dhabi. When Dean Stoneman failed to secure pole position for the feature race, it assured Lynn the title as Stoneman had to score maximum points to take the title away from his fellow British driver. Lynn is the first British GP3 championship.
Winners From the Weekend
You know about Lewis Hamilton and Sam Bird but did you know...
Stoffel Vandoorne and Stefano Coletti split the GP2 finale from Abu Dhabi.
Dean Stoneman and Nick Yelloly split the final GP3 weekend of the season. Yelloly got the race two victory after Patric Niederhauser was disqualified.
Coming Up This Weekend
FIA World Endurance Championship ends their season at Interlagos.
Turkey Night Grand Prix at Perris Auto Speedway.
Covering All Motorsports. From Indianapolis to Le Mans, Daytona to Monaco.
