People keep saying they are now right on the back of the established teams but that first point still eludes them, have they (or any of the bottom 3) ever got higher than 13th?
No, and to be honest i think a more potent question is "will they ever score a point?" For me a huge disapointment again. Lots of talk, little progress.
The issue for them (apart from their outright pace - or lack of) is that reliability is generally very good so where in the past a Minardi could drive their ultimate race and be helped by attritionj - this is no longer the case.
Spot on. You want a point, you have to rely on speed to do it. Until Caterham can firmly get themsleves out of Q1, they stand little chance of getting points in a race without an extraordinary sequence of events happening.
I really thought the new teams would be good for F1 back in 2010, looking at it now though you have to wonder if they have actually brought anything extra to the grid? For Caterham not to have scored just one point in three years is poor quite frankly and now i agree with what Coulthard said at the start of 2010 that it's better to have 18 cars than having 24 cars and a bunch of Micky Mouses at the back
Yes but only on luck. Them developing a better car through the season will help. Just need to get ahead of STR
Caterham are possibly worth keeping, they give STR a reason to exist, other than coming up with the next Red Bull star. Marussia and HRT are struggling a lot more, although with HRT finally setting up the base they want, will they potentially be better next year? I'm still for the extra teams, as it gives 6 more guys a seat in F1 (admittedly Karthikeyan really shouldn't be there, and arguably De La Rosa with his age is being counter intuitive to this line of thought) which the sport desperately needs with the lack of testing. Even testing isn't the same, unless during test sessions, between T drivers, at the end of the day there is a mini race, with tyres given by Pirelli just for this so it doesn't compromise the day's programme.
I agree. And actually, I'd not include the word "possibly" in the first sentence: they are definitely worth keeping! When all's said and done, without little teams, there can be no big teams. As above. If that's what DC said, I disagree with him on this â so long as the 107% rule is enforced where applicable. More cars makes a better spectacle (especially at track side but also for TV), thus helping generate greater public interest. More teams bring in more money to the whole sport, which adds longevity. More teams act as an insurance against others dropping out. Red Bull and Toro Rosso would seem unlikely to be in for the long haul; and Renault have a habit of quitting at short notice. The little teams provide a platform for another engine manufacturer, thus increasing diversity and adding further 'insurance' against other engine suppliers (especially Renault). Drivers: The little teams provide six additional race seats and provide extra avenues into F1 with an additional two slots apiece (on average) for test-drivers. This may seem unimportant, but it keeps the sport 'bigger' when more opportunities exist within. Personnel: Apply the point above (for drivers), to all of the other team personnel, who also find extra avenues into F1. It applies to race-engineers; mechanics; computer boffins; team principals; cooks; truck drivers; sponsors; and all other interested parties â real or potential. There are many other reasons but this is about to become tedious. The most important thing is that when a competition has fewer competitors, it is necessarily more vulnerable. This is a very, very good point, Smithers.
I'd have to disagree on most of those points Cosi. Yes we need to have small teams to have big ones, but i think everyone would prefer the "small teams" of 2007-2009 like Super Aguri, Force India and Toro Rosso who were at least capable of an upset on occasion. I would agree with the fact that it provides more interest for the track side spectators and they do give jobs to mechanics, but for TV. You see them periodically as they get lapped thats not entertainment, and I'm not convinced it really helps the drivers either. Looking at those who have debuted with those teams, Di Grassi, Chandhok, Senna, D'Ambrosio, Ricciardo. Has they really helped any of them? They may get drivers in to the sport but without any way to show their skills in such dreadful cars they don't tend to get anywhere. Virgin Racing may have destroyed the career of Timo Glock. I don't see how they act as insurance anyway for a team dropping out, maybe financially for the sport, but in terms of us watching it. there would simply be Eight serious teams instead of Nine. While Caterham, Marussia and HRT continue to do nothing. I realise that without them there would be no Cosworth in F1, but they all seem to be trying to ditch them as a scapegoat as soon as possible anyway.
Super Aguri, STR and FI had it easier... Super Aguri: Majorly backed and had the (at the time) powerful honda engine. There car was basically the Arrows/Prost Chassis and they had the talent of Sato and Ide behind the wheel. STR: They were carrying on from the years of experiance grown from Minardi. They were heavily backed by Red Bull and were allowed to start off with a cheap and powerfull Cosworth V10 engine while others used V8s. The had access to the best up and coming talent Red Bull had to offer. Force India: Carrying on from a former winning team of Jordan (with spyker and midland in between) and owned by an indian Billonaire. They also had good drivers like Fisichella and sutil behind the wheel and an engine contract with Ferrari. ...... Where did todays back 3 come from? A stupid budget lie from Mosely and Ecclestone and forced to use underpowered Cosworth V8s, no solid major backing from investors as they joined when F1 was declining and drivers were also hard to come by with the scraps of Glock and Kovi. F1 was also thinking of splitting up at the time. Where are they now? well within 107% getting stronger and more sponsoship on there cars and still alive so.....Good enough
Another point to make about Caterham, Marussia and HRT is that they have had to deal with more technical shake-ups and aerodynamic revolutions in their three years than some more recently established teams in their entire F1 lifetimes.
TV: We all have our preferences but I believe past studies (apologies for no citation) have clearly shown that more cars on track attracts more viewers. Drivers: The minnow teams have certainly helped. Most people interested in motor racing now know the names Lucas di Grassi, Jerome D'Ambrosio and Karun Chandhok. Such 'fame' is a gigantic feather in the cap, and their futures are very much more secure than they would have otherwise been. These guys have held Super Licences and will easily generate sponsorship in any form of motor racing, wherever they choose to go. Without these minnow teams, you and everyone else would know the names of fewer drivers. And of course, Senna and Ricciardo are still benefitting: they are still on show and still have the potential to graduate to bigger teams. And Virgin Racing has certainly not destroyed the career of Glock. Anything but! – It has provided a means of maintaining the attention of the whole motor racing fraternity and all of its potential sponsors. Indeed, it could easily be argued that without his current team, he might be out of F1. This is a massive 'help' to any professional race driver. 'Insurance': I meant this in the sense that with more teams, the sport itself is more self-assured: i.e. it has a stronger base on which to stand. Eating away at such reinforced foundations leaves the whole structure of F1 standing on less firm ground. Cosworth: Here is a whole industry which prides itself on technical know-how. It is therefore important that this knowledge and capacity for innovation is not restricted to Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault. With more engines (eggs) in one's basket, the survival of the species becomes more likely. When Toyota, Honda and BMW got fed up with being messed around, they decided enough was enough. And that was a dangerous time for F1, which almost lost its footing… It could easily be argued that Cosworth steadied the ship. And despite the rules they expected not coming to fruition, they are still here! And that's Heroic with a capital H! Although I know of none, anyone trying to ditch Cosworth as a scapegoat is ignorant in the extreme.
