<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Breaking the Formula &#8211; Rules are there to be&#8230; changed?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/</link>
	<description>...Formula One isn&#039;t boring</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:50:50 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave H</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3138</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:17:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3138</guid>
		<description>Didn&#039;t work on Firefox yesterday, but works fine from IE.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Didn&#8217;t work on Firefox yesterday, but works fine from IE.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: links for 2010-02-10 &#171; vee8 - Formula 1 and motorsport news roundups and opinion</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3137</link>
		<dc:creator>links for 2010-02-10 &#171; vee8 - Formula 1 and motorsport news roundups and opinion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:04:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3137</guid>
		<description>[...] The 2010 F1 Rule Changes &#124; F1 Badger [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The 2010 F1 Rule Changes | F1 Badger [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marty</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3108</link>
		<dc:creator>Marty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:36:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3108</guid>
		<description>I got the same - very annoying.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I got the same &#8211; very annoying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Milleneuve</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3103</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Milleneuve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3103</guid>
		<description>It worked for me yesterday evening when trialling it for this article!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It worked for me yesterday evening when trialling it for this article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Milleneuve</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3102</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Milleneuve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:42:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3102</guid>
		<description>I agree with you 3oin - and the last thing I would want as a fan is the sport to be &quot;dumbed-down&quot;.   That said it can be simplified and more accessible without being dumbed down - as you correctly said it is a bit a balancing act.  

The main reason for writing this piece is that &#039;they&#039; don&#039;t seem to realise this need for improved accessibility and instead dream up more ridiculous rules.  

The best thing they could have done for 2010, with the banning of refueling is to make strategy more free and allow teams to do what they like - i.e. someone could elect not to stop at all or someone could stop 5 times and put the softest, grippiest tyres known to man on their wheels. - that would be sure to guarantee exciting racing.

*sadly the survey doesn&#039;t have a text box for my suggestion, hence as a fan and writer my overall review of the survey is that it&#039;s a waste of time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you 3oin &#8211; and the last thing I would want as a fan is the sport to be &#8220;dumbed-down&#8221;.   That said it can be simplified and more accessible without being dumbed down &#8211; as you correctly said it is a bit a balancing act.  </p>
<p>The main reason for writing this piece is that &#8216;they&#8217; don&#8217;t seem to realise this need for improved accessibility and instead dream up more ridiculous rules.  </p>
<p>The best thing they could have done for 2010, with the banning of refueling is to make strategy more free and allow teams to do what they like &#8211; i.e. someone could elect not to stop at all or someone could stop 5 times and put the softest, grippiest tyres known to man on their wheels. &#8211; that would be sure to guarantee exciting racing.</p>
<p>*sadly the survey doesn&#8217;t have a text box for my suggestion, hence as a fan and writer my overall review of the survey is that it&#8217;s a waste of time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave H</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3101</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3101</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t fill in the survey yet! I just wasted 40mins of my life and was greeted with:
&quot;The survey hasn&#039;t been started yet. Please try again later&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t fill in the survey yet! I just wasted 40mins of my life and was greeted with:<br />
&#8220;The survey hasn&#8217;t been started yet. Please try again later&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave H</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3100</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:35:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3100</guid>
		<description>Warning: This a bit of a rant..

It&#039;s long been my standing that &quot;Overtaking Working Group&quot; have no idea what they&#039;re doing. Their meetings probably consist of a coffee-mornings with pop music and random ideas being thrown around then being submitted because &#039;they might work&#039;. 
It doesn&#039;t take an idiot to figure out that rule stability produces close racing. With the engine-freeze starting a couple of years ago, the only improvements that can be made were on aerodynamics and once a car had reached the edge of the envelope further developments were bringing miniscule amounts. This allowed the slower teams to catch up, rather than be faced with a constantly moving goal. By 2005, most teams had caught up with Ferrari since they simply could not make their cars go any faster because they&#039;d peaked within the rules.
Overhauling the rules has always created large gaps between the cars. We had Brawn last year, and previously the big rule-change was 1998 where McLaren were so far ahead that they lapped the entire field in the first race.

The new Qualifying tyre rule is ridiculous (and has irked me somewhat). 
F1 teams consist of mostly-boring people whose idea of a perfect GP is to have their cars perform optimum laptimes consistantly and finish miles ahead of everyone else with as few interactions with other cars as possible. These people should not be entrusted with attempting to &#039;improve the show&#039;. The only reason i can think of for this idiotic idea is so that the teams don&#039;t have to fire their strategists. 
Last year we had the announcement that low-fuel qualifying was back and we all rejoiced, this year we had the announcement that proper qualifying was to carry knock-on effects for the race again and we groaned.
Hello teams and organisers, i&#039;ll tell you how to improve qualifying: 1 session, 1 hour, fresh tyres, 12 Laps. And abolish that stupid blocking rule; if a driver gets held up with 2mins to go then that&#039;s the team&#039;s fault for leaving it so late.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Warning: This a bit of a rant..</p>
<p>It&#8217;s long been my standing that &#8220;Overtaking Working Group&#8221; have no idea what they&#8217;re doing. Their meetings probably consist of a coffee-mornings with pop music and random ideas being thrown around then being submitted because &#8216;they might work&#8217;.<br />
It doesn&#8217;t take an idiot to figure out that rule stability produces close racing. With the engine-freeze starting a couple of years ago, the only improvements that can be made were on aerodynamics and once a car had reached the edge of the envelope further developments were bringing miniscule amounts. This allowed the slower teams to catch up, rather than be faced with a constantly moving goal. By 2005, most teams had caught up with Ferrari since they simply could not make their cars go any faster because they&#8217;d peaked within the rules.<br />
Overhauling the rules has always created large gaps between the cars. We had Brawn last year, and previously the big rule-change was 1998 where McLaren were so far ahead that they lapped the entire field in the first race.</p>
<p>The new Qualifying tyre rule is ridiculous (and has irked me somewhat).<br />
F1 teams consist of mostly-boring people whose idea of a perfect GP is to have their cars perform optimum laptimes consistantly and finish miles ahead of everyone else with as few interactions with other cars as possible. These people should not be entrusted with attempting to &#8216;improve the show&#8217;. The only reason i can think of for this idiotic idea is so that the teams don&#8217;t have to fire their strategists.<br />
Last year we had the announcement that low-fuel qualifying was back and we all rejoiced, this year we had the announcement that proper qualifying was to carry knock-on effects for the race again and we groaned.<br />
Hello teams and organisers, i&#8217;ll tell you how to improve qualifying: 1 session, 1 hour, fresh tyres, 12 Laps. And abolish that stupid blocking rule; if a driver gets held up with 2mins to go then that&#8217;s the team&#8217;s fault for leaving it so late.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 3oin</title>
		<link>http://www.f1badger.com/2010/02/2010-f1-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-3095</link>
		<dc:creator>3oin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.f1badger.com/?p=13347#comment-3095</guid>
		<description>I agree with you.. mostly.. I just think it would be a great shame to &quot;Dumb Down&quot; the sport. Perhaps there&#039;s a balance between over and under complicating the technical side of things. Hasn&#039;t F1 and motor sport historically appealed to those that are interested in engineering and machines anyway? I really hope it doesn&#039;t get over simplified or at least that the technical information is still available somewhere to those of us that are interested. Remember &quot;nerdy&quot; is good, &quot;geeky&quot; is bad and &quot;mainstream&quot; is boring ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you.. mostly.. I just think it would be a great shame to &#8220;Dumb Down&#8221; the sport. Perhaps there&#8217;s a balance between over and under complicating the technical side of things. Hasn&#8217;t F1 and motor sport historically appealed to those that are interested in engineering and machines anyway? I really hope it doesn&#8217;t get over simplified or at least that the technical information is still available somewhere to those of us that are interested. Remember &#8220;nerdy&#8221; is good, &#8220;geeky&#8221; is bad and &#8220;mainstream&#8221; is boring ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
