Where F1 goes, the others follow, it seems. Autosport magazine has a report that Champ Car drivers are incensed by new tire chicanes introduced at Surfers Paradise. The system has already caused accidents in practice, in one of which Justin Wilson fractured his wrist and will not be able to drive in the race.

Echoes of F1 occur towards the end of the report with Sebastien Bourdais’ comments on the matter:

Bourdais is particularly unhappy because the current idea was proposed to the four-man driver safety committee – Bourdais, Wilson, Alex Tagliani, Oriol Servia – with (Tony) Cotman (Champ Car’s VP of Operations) sending diagrams to each, and they unanimously disapproved.

“I said to Tony, ‘What, are you trying to kill us?’ We suggested something similar to Long Beach, using rumble strips, and then we get here and discover that, hey, they’re going to run what they proposed anyway. So what was the point in asking us?”

How familiar that sounds. Compare it to this extract from the FIA’s September press release on their new high speed safety barrier:

The owners of circuits licensed for Formula One are required not to discuss safety measures with third parties (including drivers). This is to prevent self-appointed experts, with little or no understanding of the latest developments in circuit safety, causing confusion and undermining the significant safety benefits which are now being achieved.

What it amounts to is that the drivers, the people who are going to suffer the consequences of any mistakes made by the governing body, get no say in the assessment of proposed new safety measures. The arrogance of this astounds me. If the F1 drivers are “self-appointed experts”, how much more so are the delegates of the FIA and their chosen safety measure designers who have never sat in the seat of a racing car in their lives? To say that drivers, who have experienced the effects of coming into contact with various attempts to limit the dangers of racing accidents, have nothing to contribute towards the design and introduction of new systems is short-sighted, to say the least. Drivers know what it’s like and will be able to foresee problems where none occur to the “experts”.

It seems that something very similar is happening in Champ Cars now – and this just at the time when we thought the Americans had a much more sensible approach to such things. How often during the latest FIA fiasco have we gazed at the low profiles maintained by the governing bodies of Champ Cars and Indy Cars and wished that F1 could learn from them? But no, it looks as if things happen the other way around and the Statesiders are learning from F1 instead.

Ah well, if nothing else, I suppose we can always say that it proves that F1 is the pinnacle of the sport…

In the late sixties and throughout the seventies, Cosworth engines powered more race winners than any other engine. They have soldiered on since then, producing F1 power plants for independent teams, but now it seems the end has come.

The FIA’s decision to allow Ferrari to supply two teams with engines has effectively taken away Cosworth’s last potential customer. There has to be some irony in the fact that, while proclaiming their wish to support the independent manufacturer in F1, the FIA has made it impossible for the only independent engine supplier to continue.

With Ferrari about to sign contracts with Spyker-MF1 and Toro Rosso, Red Bull taking Renault engines, and Williams going to Toyota, there is nowhere for Cosworth to run except the unlikely possibility of engines for Prodrive when they enter the game in 2008. Meanwhile, Prodrive are saying that they want a complete engine/chassis deal with a manufacturer, something that is prevented by the rules on customer cars anyway. It is a sorry story for the little guy in F1.

I suppose that, if the FIA stick by their customer car rule, Prodrive might have to produce their own chassis – in which case, Cosworth could return. But, as Bernard Ferguson points out, in the intervening year, Cosworth will lose most of its staff. Which cannot bode well for their ability to suddenly ramp up to F1 if required.

So why has the FIA decided to make an exception to their own rules for Ferrari? I don’t know but am very tempted to answer: because Ferrari asked them to…

The FIA have issued a statement concerning decisions made at the World Motor Sport Council’s meeting yesterday. The full document is displayed on the FIA website but the changes to the safety car rules are perhaps the most interesting.

Safety Car
When the Safety Car is deployed no car is permitted to enter the pits until all are bunched up behind the Safety Car. This is to remove all incentive for cars to be driven quickly back to the pits for refuelling when the Safety Car is deployed.
Before the Safety Car returns to the pits any lapped car between cars running on the lead lap must pass those cars and the safety car. It may then proceed around the track to take up position at the back of the line of cars behind the safety car.
Before a race is resumed any lapped car between cars running on the lead lap must pass those cars and the safety car and then proceed around the track to take up position at the back of the line of cars behind the safety car.

These changes were made as a result of complaints from the drivers at being held up by lapped cars after the safety car returns to the pits. The intent of the new rules is good but, being ever suspicious of change, I wonder if there will be unforeseen effects.

Take that first statement, for instance: When the Safety Car is deployed no car is permitted to enter the pits until all are bunched up behind the Safety Car. How will drivers at the front of the line be able to tell when all the cars are bunched up? Presumably, some official or other will have to decide this and then notify the drivers. Okay, so they’re halfway round a lap and the word goes out – “The pits are open, boys!” Can you imagine what happens next?

Yes, of course, everyone heads for the pits at the same time. Bearing in mind the events of this season, when Michael Schumacher had to wait his turn until Massa’s car had been seen to, next year all the teams will have facilities ready for both their cars to be serviced at once. So, when I say “everyone”, I mean exactly that. We could see some fascinating traffic jams in that event!

Then there is the matter of backmarkers passing the safety car and heading round the circuit to rejoin the tail of the line. Why this is so important that it has to be repeated almost word for word, I don’t know, but I think it should be specified just when this is to happen. Will it be before, during or after all the cars are bunched up and the pits are opened?

Sensibly, it should be done before the pitstops so that drivers whose teams foul up (with a misbehaving fuel rig, for instance) will not be able to recoup any lost places in the subsequent re-shuffle behind the safety car. That means that the cars will have to circulate longer than usual before making their stops, which could be bad news for those who were about to come in for fuel anyway. But I guess that’s racing.

Tinkering with the rules is always a delicate business and there are bound to be unexpected problems that arise as a result. I am quite sure that I haven’t foreseen all the difficulties inherent in these new rules but they do begin to address a problem that needed attending to; too often we have seen close battles ruined by backmarkers after a safety car period.

In the end, I suppose that, if the rule changes prove unworkable, they can always go back to how things were before. Oops, the FIA don’t do that, do they?

Bernie Ecclestone has been interviewed by The Times newspaper regarding his opinion on how things will go in F1 next year. There are no great surprises, but “Mr. Formula One” has a few words to say to Jenson Button, my tip for the title. To be champion, Button needs to display the drive and commitment so evident in Michael Schumacher, says Bernie.

“Michael has given up so much to achieve what he has achieved,” Ecclestone said. “He is dedicated to what he is and puts himself under an awful lot of pressure. He’ll win a race and next day start testing. I’m not sure whether Jenson is prepared to do that.

“I would say that Jenson is much like the old-time drivers. The Graham Hill type of driver with all the talent that they need, except nowadays you’ve got to be dedicated, too.

“The biggest thing that can help Honda is Jenson,” he said. “He needs to get stuck into it and stuck into them, making sure they deliver him the equipment to make him a consistent winner.”

Nothing much to argue with there, although I sometimes wonder if Michael is really so much more dedicated than the other drivers. Everyone knows the level of commitment and fitness required these days and I suspect that most of the drivers work just as hard as does Michael. They would be fools to do otherwise and none of them strike me as lacking in intelligence.

There is no doubt that Michael does have something special, however; you don’t win seven world titles without that. If I were asked to name the difference, I would have to say just two words: Flavio Briatore.

It was Briatore who saw Michael’s potential and gave him everything he needed to fulfill it, including the adoration and obedience of the Benetton team. By the time the German went to Ferrari, he knew exactly what was required to win consistently. He supplied the talent, determination and fitness to succeed as an individual but he also insisted on the same level of commitment from his team. In effect, he created a new Ferrari team by bringing in the personnel he needed and concentrating their minds on the task ahead.

But it was Briatore who gave Michael the understanding of what it takes to win: the undivided support of the team. And one suspects that Bernie is right in doubting that Jenson has the monomania necessary to achieve that – he seems too nice a guy. At the moment the Honda team are betting on both horses, giving Button and Barrichello equal attention without preference. I wonder whether this can be the right approach for a team on the edge of success but not quite there yet.

So it comes down to the old argument between having two star drivers or a clear number one and number two. Looking at Michael’s success, we would have to say that the second system is more effective. Pour your energies into the faster driver and keep the second man as back-up if needed, that is the way to go. Equality brings competition between team members and can result in the loss of a championship, as Williams discovered when both Alan Jones and Carlos Reutemann were their drivers in 1981, splitting the points and losing out ultimately to Nelson Piquet (who was a definite number 1 in the Brabham team).

Can Button persuade Honda to favor him over Barrichello? Perhaps if Button has a very special race in Brazil this weekend, he might achieve it. But Rubens isn’t going to like that one bit…