I read an article on Pitpass.com (an independent F1 website) yesterday that has me pondering the importance of F1. Actually the importance of the name F1, rather than the sport itself. The article, which you can access here, suggests that Formula One Management czar, Bernie Ecclestone might have plans to change the F1 series’ name to GP1. This would create a hierarchical structure with GP1 being the top tier of a racing ladder above GP2 and a possible future GP3 series - all of which Bernie owns the trademarks to.

For me, Formula 1 is Jim Clark four-wheel drifting a Lotus through a bend at Spa, Fangio exercising sublime control of his Maserati around the Ring or Senna driving beyond the limit in the canyons of Monaco - I could go on and on. I can’t think of F1 without seeing those images and a thousand more in my mind’s eye. F1 is as much about the past as it is about next season’s champion or tomorrow’s race winner.

The danger of changing the name - in the collective minds of the public, it now becomes something entirely new. When even die-hard fans examine grand prix racing, we only go as far back as 1950 - we discount everything before. Of course there was no formal world championship before 1950 so it’s not completely fair to say only that the name is to blame for this historical amnesia but there was the European Championship in the 1930’s which was essentially the grand prix world championship.

In my opinion it’s vital to preserve the continuity of the sport. How many people today really know the names Nuvolari, Rosemeyer or Caracciola. Each was a legendary grand prix driver in the early days of the sport. But, once the sport was labeled Formula 1 and a world championship was established, they were consigned to the past. Only the real anoraks of grand prix racing recall their exploits.

Other motor sports have suffered from name changes. Sports car racing suffered from an identity crisis when season after season, the name of the series (and format) changed -incidentally one time at the behest of Bernie Ecclestone. Likewise, after the split in open-wheel racing in North America, CART became Open Wheel Racing Series and then finally Champ Car. While there were many factors that contributed to the demise of each series, the inability of the public to easily identify them hurt their popularity.

If Formula 1 suddenly becomes GP1, most of the current fans will no doubt accept it as status quo. The same participants will be there as before: Ferrari; McLaren; Williams. Would new fans make the same connection and balance the racing against nearly 60 years of rich history? What connection would fans have with Lotus, Brabham, Tyrrell, Senna, Villeneuve or even Schumacher?

History and sentimentality have rarely prevailed over business interests. It is no secret that Bernie Ecclestone has tried several times and at great cost to trademark the names F1 and Formula 1. He has, for the most part, been unsuccessful because of the generic nature of the phrase, “formula 1.” The name GP1 is a brand however and Ecclestone could successfully argue ownership. Financially, this would be lucrative for Bernie, who could license the name as he saw fit and deny its use to anyone not willing to pay up.

I hope that the article from Pitpass proves to be idle speculation and that Formula 1 can look forward to a long and distinguished history. Business concerns seldom enhance sport and I worry that this particular strategy by Ecclestone could destroy the heritage of the sport. It’s only a name, but so is Ferrari. How iconic would a Ferrari be if tomorrow it was renamed a FIAT Ultra Brand Sportscar.

If you have an opinion on this topic, please post your thoughts in a comment here or e-mail me at rob@f1underground.com

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

It was Shakespeare who penned, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Truer words were never spoken and history is populated with examples of good-intentioned men doing evil once they have tasted power. The annals of Formula 1 are no different.

The sport has grown from a largely amateur affair to what is now a multi-billion dollar sports entertainment enterprise. Along the way some of Formula 1’s participants have become fantastically rich powerbrokers on the world stage. Certain of these powerbrokers have done better than others and today control the sport. Of course, I speak of Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley who respectively, have gained a great deal of money and power from F1.

The contribution of both men must be acknowledged. They wrested the sport from the well attired polo club set and made it the professional motorsport showpiece it is today. That process began nearly 30 years ago but for the past 15 plus years, both have reigned unopposed, sharing near absolute power.

Increasingly its obvious that near absolute power is not enough. Yesterday, the FIA announced that it was replacing its independent race stewart, Tony-Scott Andrews who retired at the end of 2007, with three FIA nominated race stewarts. These ‘amateurs’ will come from various FIA affiliated national racing organizations.

To oversee the process and assist the nominated stewarts in their judgments, Max Mosley is assigning his official representative Alan Donnelly. Given the authority that Donnelly has in his role its not unimaginable that his guidance might carry considerable weight with the stewarts. Its also not a terribly large leap to imagine that Donnelly’s guidance is really the thinly disguised hand of the FIA President.

This reorganization of the race stewarts erodes the separation of powers (political and judicial) within the sports governing body.   Of course, the President of the FIA will point out that he has no influence over the decisions of the race stewarts - he doesn’t participate in the ‘independent’ committee.  He’s right of course, on paper he’s not part of the process.  But, one must be naive to believe this is true in practice.

Under Mosley, F1 is moving closer and closer to totalitarian rule.  The power that lies in the FIA Presidency today is as much or more than when Mosley came to office in 1991. Ironically, Mosley ran for the Presidency of FISA (eventually brought under the FIA umbrella in 1993) in response to political interference affecting a 1991 stewarts ruling.

“What happened to Ayrton Senna two years ago in Japan, disgusted me, […]That is when I realised that Fisa was not a fair organisation.”

Then FISA/FIA President, Jean-Marie Balestre was widely reported to have intervened to ensure that the race stewards disqualified Senna from the race (costing him the championship.)  Mosley campaigned on the basis that Balestre, who was also president of the FIA and of the Fédération Française du Sport Automobile, could not effectively manage all of these roles together. Mosley won by 43 votes to 29. *

18 years later, it’s all coming full circle.  The FIA President will once again have influence over not just the rulebook but how the rules will be interpreted and administered.  From the idealistic outsider who rose to power on a platform of fairness, Max has become of very thing he campaigned to defeat - a tyrant.

* From Wikipedia

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!