A series with the best drivers in the world?

That's beyond funny.

Actually - in my world it is. I know all the "best" aren't there but in my opinion F1:s status is so far above the rest of motorsports that it doesn't really matter. History, marketvalue, whatever you want to call it makes F1 so far above the rest of motorsports and that is what they should do everything to keep. Some more deserttracks and F1 won't be F1 anymore.

It is the "pinnacle of motorsports". Not "supposed to be...". It is the top. It might not be that way forever but it still is. Each race has more in common with major sporting events like the World Cup, the Olympics, Wimbledon...than gocart, rally, Nascar, IRL or whatever.

It is meant to be a showcase of the world's best drivers and the very latest in technology but Bahrain was an appalling advertisment for the sport

Its Bernie's trainset.

None of the above.
Its a joke.

You're completely wrong. F1 is very much like karting, rallying and GT in terms of drivers and teams.

In terms of engineering talent the cream really does rise to the top in F1. You can NOT buy yourself an engineering placement in an F1 team whereas you CAN buy yourself a seat.

Motorsport is completely unique in that an F1 driver can go all the way back to karting and have their arse handed to them on a plate. It's like a premiership team going back to play an under 16 tournament and getting soundly beaten.

Engineering talent does rise to the top, whereas driving talent kinda floats about and it all depends on funding. It's not a bad thing as such, it's just the way it is.

FAILURE - HELP!

This did not turn out as I had hoped. My fault entirely. I was hoping to get a discussion going that contrasted two extreme views of F1. On one hand a series of short sprints and on the other a start to finish race. Someone posted that it was all about pitstops. I guess that is true but I did not want to get hung up on pitstops per se.

What I had hoped for was that the discussion might evolve into a contrast about differing strategies. For example. How would F1 evolve if no pitstops were allowed. Would we still get some teams evolving their car along the lines of pre 2010 cars and persisting with the sprint tyre racing that we saw in Bahrain. And would there be any scope for financially strapped teams to go for a development programme that delivered a car that might be very kind to its tyres and did not need a pitstop. A kind of hare and tortoise comparison I suppose. Would it make a difference to development and might we divergence of development strategies.

Many of the comments have answered the question that I asked, I just asked the wrong question!

Buttoneer said that the poll could be changed, I don't mind one or two of you deciding to change the poll or even restarting it if you want. I think that through my muddled thinking there is an interesting discussion in there somewhere.

Sorry for the confusion!

This is what F1 is about! I miss those days lol

LOL!

He only wanted to give him a speeding ticket!

or was trying to sell him a newspaper!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx1TDFV5Vhk

Pitstop strategy and rules don't define what F1 is, it's more the rules that dictate the type of cars that race in it; the engine, the tyres themselves, the dimensions, the aero. Refuelling and no refuelling are both part of F1s history, it isn't one or the other.

Set only a few parameters:

- Minimum weight
- Maximum width
- Maximum engine displacement
- Car-to-pit telemetry/radio only
- No wings

Basically, if it fits in the box, it's legal. Additionally, I'd make one more change:

- Run 75 laps at every event

This is F1. Or, should be:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRJwZu5Qqio...feature=related

What? one car w/mechanical problem and one without, being able to make a pass. I'd rather see two cars running at their maximum, rather than one handicapped car trying to defend a position from a healthy car running at its maximum.

For me. that was just like Alonso's pass on Vettel...BFD the 'pass for the lead' was a healthy car passing a stricken car.

Go watch the 1979 French GP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjE70UiCknk (I know you've seen it before, but it's always worth another look ) two cars and most importantly two drivers willing to fight for position rather than the PC generation namby-pambies behind the wheel of these self-annoited pinnacle of motorsport drivers.

This is Formula One:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAV6eQQ5TLY

F1 lacks any coherent identity because it changes so frequently.

LOVE IT

Why do we even need todays aero cars anymore? we don't. Why not run tires that manufactures can learn something from, other than about 747, 767, 777, etc tires.

Good point there, I had forgotten about Alonso's braking issues during that particular race. Nevertheless, the point was that F1 should be run on classic tracks by cars able to overtake each other, driven by drivers willing to overtake. It's a very delicate balance of ingredients there, unfortunately this year apparently there'll be no soup for us.

Talking about Dijon 1979, that clip doesn't do justice to the epic fight. This one does

Fantastic. Was that sponsored by an ice cream company.

Actually, you could not be more wrong ;)
It was a Grand Prix. There was even F2 cars in there. That is the spirit that has gone missing, the Grand Prix one. Now it is just an invite series racing almost identical cars. They do not even win anything big, do they? Why is it still called GP?