Yeah, I can relate to that idea, jpk. The basis of putting the drivers back into the equation is, as you say keep it simple. Removal of aids that make it possible for a mediocre driver to keep one of those beasts on track looks like a great idea on the surface.

But (there's always a but, isn't there?), the thing that has most strongly contributed to the admitted boredom factor in motor sport, is the development of aerodynamics to the current level.

Remove all the computers, traction control, super accurate fuel measurement, push to pass rev boosters, active suspension, and pitlane telemetry, and you are left with cars that are still capable of outstripping the limits of the track.

Processional races are mainly due to one physical fact. There is only one fastest racing line. no matter how wide the road may be.

The only thing that alters that is super-long straights, where cars with a speed advantage of just 2 - 5 kph would have room to pass, and slipstreaming might get you ahead in a slightly slower car.

In European racing there are very few tracks which could be modified to fit this model, and, I believe even fewer Stateside.

Racing engineers will continue to develop and improve whatever package you allow until it results in the same situation again. It's what they do.

I don't know the answer, I wish I did, but motor racing has never stopped short of the physical limits of man and machine, and there's not much hope of rule changes altering that.

The future doesn't look that great, and it won't be improved by the kind of stupidity we saw last week.

Don T.