Qualifying loophole revealed
Fuel level 'cheat' possible?

(GMM) It is understood that F1's teams have been informed about a change to the new 'knockout' qualifying format for next year.

According to a source in the Italian press, a loophole in the proposed regulation had been identified by several concerned teams, and discussed with Charlie Whiting, of the FIA, at the recent technical directors' meeting.

Previously, the top ten cars simply needed to declare how much fuel they were running prior to the final 20-minute dash.

Then, at the end of the session, the car would be permitted to re-fuel to that fuel level for the grand prix.

But it was apparently feared that some teams would declare a high fuel load before the session, then somehow use, or leak, a large quantity of the fuel on the out-laps. In so doing, a low fuel load - and therefore a lighter and quicker car - would be guaranteed for qualifying, but the car could then start the race with a decent fuel load.

The details of how the FIA intend to close the loophole is not known, but it is speculated that the amount of fuel used during the final qualifying stint will be worked out by the FIA by using calculations based on normal V8-spec F1 fuel consumption.

In this way, if a car has 'leaked' its fuel, the team will only be able to re-fill the car based on normal fuel calculations. A very light car for qualifying, then, will still be light for the race.

The news is likely to draw yet more criticism from those who think the 'knockout' format was already too complicated.

- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

This is stupid. F1 is silly. I've watched every race since '92 until the just-completed season where I watched two. The one-tyre rule doesn't save much money when you compare it to the team budgets. It was dangerous and stupid. F1 is run by marketing men and bankers and it its rubbish today.

The old qualifying with all drivers jockeying for an open track at the end of the session was fine. The old racetracks with no run-off areas and great atmosphere have been replaced by these new-style designs in Bahrain, China and other locations I don't want to watch a race from. F1's become too corporate, and I've been a banker myself. Racing series should be run by people who know racing! The Williams F1 team was so successful because its managers and executives know and love racing! They're not accountants or marketing experts who pretend to know racing.. I think viewership will fall again next year.

Wow these team never give up they all ways find a way to get around rules and regulations. I really can't blame them since there is some serious money involved in the sport. Unfortunately sports tend to get easily corruped by money.

I thought the 2005 season was really great, especially compared to the last few years. The constant regulation changes in the name of cost-cutting and things of that sort are ridiculous. It is stupid because cutting costs in F1 is almost impossible, so you'll basically have slower cars that still cost a hell of a lot of money to develop, produce, and race.

An interesting article on this:
- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

"By far the biggest source of discontent that exists in the sport is the fact that Ferrari gets more money than the other teams, even if it does not perform."
I'd never heard anything about this before, anyone have any more info?

I'm not sure, Carbon. I believed that there was a pool of money available for the teams from the old Concorde agreement. Teams get a share of the TV money and whoever wins the championship gets a larger share. I remember a few years ago at the Oz GP, Minardi scored a point or two and that was supposedly worth millions in guaranteed money for the next racing season.

I think cutting cost in F1 is possible. Racing in the 1960s did not cost that much at all and back then, there weren't many corporate sponsors so the revenue base was smaller too. It's only possible by doing away with the greatest expense: Testing costs. The major teams spend 20-25% of their budget on testing. The long-life tyre and engine rule pale in comparison to a reduced testing window.

Yeah but if you put restrictions on testing, they will just do the best they can to simulate the actual testing in their facilities. If you can't run an engine on a track in a GP simulation, then they'll just strap it to a dyno and do it in a lab instead.

But time in a lab does not equal track time. You make a good point, but it is the massive logistics of testing across Europe, unless you own your own tracks like Ferrari, that causes the testing budgets to swell to $50-100 million for some teams. A former F1 and motorcycle champion, John Surtees, gave an interview talking about some of the rule changes. He feels the restrictions don't cut costs and hinders F1. I think people like him should be in-charge of F1. He understands racing, business and made him name in the sport. F1 doesn't need bean counters calling the shots. At least the banks who owned F1 have sold their interests. Now if it can only rid itself of the marketers and accountants....