This may have been posted in the 'Box' already (not sure), but I thought it deserved a look in the garage.
http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2008/12/8775.html
Well, what do you think. I think, bad idea! I don't think the 'best driver' is necessarily the guy who can go the fastest on a given day. That's what qualifying is for. The whole reason we have an eight or ten month championship, and even 60-70 lap races for that matter, is to see who can consistently pull together fast laps in order to produce a good result. If that weren't the case, Formula 1 would just be a multi-million dollar autocross, with everyone out there competing for TTOD! I know it's supposed to encourage hard wheel to wheel racing, but most of the time races aren't decided that way. We get some wheel to wheel at the beginning, and then things calm down, and through the coarse of the race we see which team has got the car of the day and which driver is the most dialed into the track, and the drivers all spread out based on the times they are REALLY, consistently capable of. It's not because any one of them is not trying! If they CAN catch up and race to the end, they do!
I don't think we should penalize a driver like Robert Kubica for not bringing in lots of wins in an outclassed car, even though he's out there keeping the top teams running for their lives every race weekend. And if he can place 2nd or 3rd more consistently than some leadfoot can land some sporadic wins in between meetings with the wall and engine failures, I think he deserves to take it! And by the way, most of the time it works out to where the guy with the most wins takes the championship anyways. The fact that a consistent bride's maid has a chance to lead the championship is only proof that you have a good, close fight on your hands, and I don't think you should mess with that! I don't think it's a bad thing that BMW and Renault know the don't have the outright speed and are approaching the fight a different way.
The long and the short of it: I think that this move would just make impossible the already near impossible task of toppling McLaren and Ferrari, and result in a bunch of busted machinery. I think what they're really looking for is marketable carnage, NASCAR style. My $.02
Mark D.

Probably would cause a mechanical mess, but just as it was always the France's NASCAR, and Bishop's IMSA, it's Bernie's F1. If he wants it that way, it seems to get done. If he doesn't, it doesn't get done.

How exactly did this used car salesman get to such a position of power? He must be making a lot of people lots of money (besides himself of course).

He's barking up the wrong tree if he thinks medals will make the race more exciting by enticing drivers to go for positions 1-3. First off, these cars can't get close to each other to overtake because of the extreme braking and acceleration of the cars.

Second, backmarker teams are lucky to get even 1 point by finishing 8th. I think it was a good idea to expand the points from 6th to 8th. This is a step in the wrong direction.

F1 is so fucked up now it really doesn't make any difference.

I clicked on the link and as soon as I saw it was Bernie, I knew it was messed up.

I read that article. Bearnie must have gotten into somebody's weed.
The new KERS issue, the larger adjustable front wing (2 times per lap), the smaller rear wing, the new aero rules, will dictate my involvement next year. I will watch the first few races and see if I am going to follow the rest of the year. The whole reason I loved watching F1 was the technology that went into it. Yes, it is very expensive

I guess Bernie didn't watch the race then... that was the most exciting finish to a season that I've ever seen.

Chas'n ain't Rac'n...

Even though I like the new technology they use, it's hard to watch parade lap after parade lap with the driver positions changing ever so often.. kinda like the entire event is under a yellow flag...

I could watch when they televised the Porsche SuperCup as the opener. Now that's racing!

Click to view attachment