Sport or entertainment? Why levelling the playing field is problematic for F1
About this episode
F1’s attempts to “level the playing field” spark a big sport-versus-entertainment debate on The Race F1 Podcast. The hosts discuss rules meant to bring internal combustion engines “to roughly the same level,” plus cost caps and upgrade/measurement constraints that can push teams to game the system. They question whether regulation-driven unpredictability turns into “script writing,” and whether fans end up feeling outcomes are engineered—especially when strategy, controversies, or officiating shape results.
Red Bull was recently declared Formula 1's best engine under the Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities (ADUO) system, meaning rivals Mercedes and Ferrari will both get engine upgrades during the 2026 season. On the latest episode of The Undercut, Damon Hill and Mark Hughes discuss whether such a mechanism should exist at all, and whether F1 can still be considered a sport if the regulators are trying to artificially level the playing field. They also tackle the thorny topic of whether teams have been actively ‘gaming the system’…
Get bonus F1 podcasts, extra content and ad-free listening, sign-up to The Race Members' Club on Patreon today.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
internal combustion engines, ICs
"opportunities of the internal combustion engines, ICs, that's a component of the PU, the power unit."
An internal combustion engine is the part that burns fuel to make power. In today’s F1 cars, it works together with other hybrid systems, not by itself.
ICs (internal combustion engines) are the part of the F1 power unit that burns fuel to create power. In modern F1, they work alongside hybrid energy-recovery systems, so the IC is only one piece of the overall PU performance.
power unit
"opportunities of the internal combustion engines, ICs, that's a component of the PU, the power unit. Are you going to speak English in a minute?"
In F1, the power unit is the car’s main engine-and-energy system. It’s not just one engine—it's the whole setup that makes the car go, and F1 rules control it a lot.
In Formula 1, the power unit (PU) is the complete hybrid engine system that includes both the internal combustion engine and the energy-recovery components. It’s the core technology F1 regulates closely because it directly affects speed and performance.
performance equalizing mechanism
"So basically it's a performance equalizing mechanism that the FIA and F1 together combined to try and bring everybody's internal combustion engines to roughly the same level."
A performance equalizing mechanism is basically a set of rules meant to keep teams from getting too far ahead. The goal is to make races closer so more cars can compete for position.
A performance equalizing mechanism is a rule or regulation designed to reduce gaps between teams by limiting how much any one car can outperform others. In F1, this is often done through limits on engine development and other technical constraints so racing is closer.
levelling the playing field
"Is that something we should be doing? Is that right? Because to me it feels a bit like the world record 100 meter sprinters sets his time..."
“Levelling the playing field” means trying to make it fairer so one team doesn’t always win. In F1, it usually comes from rule changes that limit how much teams can pull ahead.
“Levelling the playing field” refers to efforts to make competition more even by changing rules so the strongest teams can’t dominate as easily. In F1, that can involve technical regulation choices that affect engine performance and development.
James Hunt
"whether they are, you know, playing silly games in the, in the paddock just to show their character or whatever that that imagine that being put to the, the James Hunts and the Nicky Louders."
James Hunt was a famous Formula 1 driver from the 1970s. People remember him not only for racing, but also for being a big personality off the track.
James Hunt was a British Formula 1 driver known for his flamboyant personality and entertainment value as much as his racing. He’s referenced here as an example of a driver whose public image helped make F1 feel like entertainment.
Nicky Louders
"the James Hunts and the Nicky Louders. I mean, they created their own sort of personality entertainment factor, although it may have been slightly controversial"
This sounds like Niki Lauda, a famous Formula 1 champion. He’s brought up as part of the idea that drivers’ personalities and rivalries helped make F1 entertaining.
Nicky Louders appears to be a mis-transcription of Niki Lauda, the Austrian Formula 1 champion. He’s mentioned alongside James Hunt as another driver whose persona and story contributed to F1’s entertainment appeal.
cost caps
"You've got the opportunity with cost caps and people who don't have teams that don't have the most points or they've got more space, but then maybe don't have the resources and the factory and the equipment to catch up."
Cost caps are rules that limit how much F1 teams are allowed to spend. That’s meant to keep rich teams from having a huge advantage just because they can buy more resources.
In Formula One, cost caps are limits on how much teams can spend over a season. The goal is to reduce the financial gap between wealthy teams and smaller ones, so performance isn’t determined purely by budget.
Formula One
"Because if you've denied people the opportunity, which is part of the show in Formula One is, is sharing off the manufacturing and the design and the intelligence of race teams, ability to be challenged technically."
Formula One is the highest level of open-wheel racing. Teams build and develop their cars under rules, so the competition isn’t only about the drivers—it’s also about engineering.
Formula One (F1) is the top tier of open-wheel motorsport run under the FIA, where teams compete with highly engineered cars and strict technical regulations. This segment contrasts F1’s “technological competition” with pure driver-only sport.
Christian Horner
"I can remember Christian Horner saying something to the effect of that. If you carry on down that road, you know, the drivers value will be going through the roof because if you've got a driver that's two tenths quicker and no one can get an advantage, then of course the driver is the key."
Christian Horner is a top leader in Formula 1—he runs Red Bull Racing. In this segment, he’s referenced to support the idea that if cars are equal, the drivers matter even more.
Christian Horner is the team principal of Red Bull Racing, and he’s often quoted on F1 regulation and competitiveness. Here, he’s used as an example of the argument that if performance differences are removed, driver value becomes the main differentiator.
FIA's method of measurement
"We've had Red Bull has been measured as according to the FIA's method of measurement as having the strongest internal combustion engine."
The FIA is Formula 1’s governing body. They use an official way to measure how strong certain parts of the engine are, and that measurement affects what upgrades teams can bring.
The FIA (Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile) uses an official measurement method to assess parts of the Formula 1 power unit. In this segment, it’s used to rank teams by ICE strength and to determine what kinds of upgrades are allowed to address the measured shortfall.
ice
"So yeah, so I think you could have had a scenario in those first few races where the performances were being measured... So these upgrades can only apply, be applied to the ice, the internal combustion engine part, not to the batteries and all that."
Here, “ICE” means the fuel-burning engine part. The upgrades being discussed are for that part only, not for the battery side of the hybrid system.
In this context, “ICE” is shorthand for internal combustion engine. The key point is that the allowed upgrades apply to the ICE portion of the power unit, not to the battery/hybrid side.
batteries
"So these upgrades can only apply, be applied to the ice, the internal combustion engine part, not to the batteries and all that. That's correct."
In hybrid F1 cars, batteries store energy so the car can use it later. The speaker is saying the upgrade rules in this case don’t let teams change the battery side—only the engine side.
“Batteries” here refers to the energy storage used in F1’s hybrid power unit. The speaker’s point is that the upgrade allowances being discussed target the ICE, while battery-related components are excluded.
gam[ed] it
"Yeah. So were Red Bull naive? Well, that's, it's possible. And I think this might be a new element of the competition... but they're competing against the random interference of the regulators and they've gamed it."
“Gamed it” means teams use the rules in a clever way to get an advantage. The idea here is that they might not show their full speed until after the checks happen.
“Gamed it” means teams exploit the rules and measurement process to gain an advantage. The speaker suggests teams may hold back performance data until after the regulator’s checks, so the measured results don’t reflect their true capability.
levelling up
"Yeah. Is the objective because it would make sense to conclude from this restriction on, on the leveling up the opportunity for, for other competitors to level up with the best power unit in..."
“Levelling up” in F1 refers to rule changes intended to reduce performance gaps between teams. The hosts argue that making cars/engines more equal can shift competition toward specific development areas, but it may also create a ceiling where teams converge and it becomes harder to find new performance gains.
electrical side
"The justification made was that they wanted to see the competition, the development competition be on the electrical side, on the battery side."
The “electrical side” means the parts that store and use electrical energy in the car. In F1, that can be a big part of how teams develop speed, not just the traditional engine.
The “electrical side” refers to the energy and electrical components of the F1 power unit, which are increasingly important alongside the ICE. The hosts are discussing a ruleset intent to shift development focus toward battery/energy systems rather than purely mechanical engine performance.
battery side
"The justification made was that they wanted to see the competition, the development competition be on the electrical side, on the battery side. And therefore, let's get all everybody's engines, internal combustion engines, ICs, as close as possible, equal as quickly as possible."
The “battery side” is the energy storage part of the F1 system. Rules that focus on it try to make teams’ energy use more similar, so one team can’t gain a huge advantage just by having a better energy setup.
The “battery side” is shorthand for the energy storage portion of the F1 power unit system. Development rules that target the battery/energy side aim to reduce performance gaps by limiting how differently teams can exploit energy storage and deployment.
Red Bull
"So does, does Red Bull now go, okay, we're no point in developing our internal combustion engines? We're done. That's it, it's done."
Red Bull is a Formula One team/brand that competes at the front of the grid and is used in the discussion as an example of how a team might react to “levelling” rules. The hosts speculate whether Red Bull would stop developing its internal combustion engine if it believed it couldn’t be overtaken.
Hungary
"But unless you're saying that now, Ferrari have kind of, the starting gun has been fired, and when's the next time they're measured? After Hungary, so yeah, it does get measured again."
“Hungary” is shorthand for the Hungarian Grand Prix, one of the F1 races. People use it as a marker for when they’ll reassess how the cars are performing under the rules.
“Hungary” here refers to the Hungarian Grand Prix, used as a reference point for when performance is measured again after a prior period. In F1 discussions, teams often talk about results and rule effects across specific races.
Ferrari
"But unless you're saying that now, Ferrari have kind of, the starting gun has been fired, and when's the next time they're measured?"
Ferrari is another major F1 team. Here it’s mentioned in a strategic context—when they’ll be measured again and how that affects who has the advantage.
Ferrari is a Formula One team/brand referenced as having a “starting gun” in the context of when performance is measured again. The point is about how development timing and rule effects can shift competitive advantage between teams.
Pirelli tires
"when they brought in some Pirelli tires that 2012 intro, five different winners in five races?"
Pirelli makes the tires used in Formula 1. Different tire types can change how much grip the cars have and how long the tires last, which can completely change which drivers are able to win.
Pirelli is the tire supplier for Formula 1, and the specific tire compounds and constructions can strongly affect grip, tire wear, and race strategy. When the podcast mentions “Pirelli tires” from the 2012 introduction, it’s pointing to how tire behavior can change who wins by altering performance across teams.
active car
"I was with Williams and they came up with the active car, but of course the active car was so much better"
“Active car” refers to an F1 car concept where the car uses electronics and actuators to adjust its behavior in real time (for example, suspension or aerodynamic settings) to improve grip and stability. The key point is that it can make performance less dependent on driver skill and more dependent on technology, which is why it becomes controversial when rules restrict it.
hybrid technology
"Yeah. Maybe, I don't know. I mean, that's, in this case, they seem that the hybrid technology is important in that the manufacturers are interested in that."
Hybrid technology in F1 means the car uses both a traditional engine and an energy-recovery/electric system. It helps the car use fuel more efficiently while still being fast.
In modern Formula One, hybrid technology refers to power units that combine internal combustion with energy recovery and electric assistance. The point is to improve efficiency while still delivering high performance.
scavenge and recover fuel
"But in terms of Formula One, it's produced these incredibly efficient power units, which can, can scavenge and recover fuel and everything."
This is about grabbing energy the car would normally waste and using it again. In F1 hybrids, that recovered energy helps the car move more efficiently.
“Scavenge and recover fuel” describes energy recovery in a hybrid power unit—capturing energy that would otherwise be wasted and reusing it to help propel the car. In F1, this is part of how the hybrid system improves efficiency.
pure entertainment
"So that part of the equation is, then if you would just say, let's just do it for pure entertainment, you'd have dragster engines with nitrous oxide and flames coming up back all the time."
This means making F1 mainly for show—prioritizing excitement over other goals. The speaker is saying F1 can’t just chase spectacle without consequences for the rules and technology.
“Pure entertainment” is the idea of designing the sport mainly for spectacle rather than for technical development, manufacturer goals, or cost control. The speaker contrasts that with the current hybrid-era direction of F1.
nitrous oxide
"you'd have dragster engines with nitrous oxide and flames coming up back all the time."
Nitrous oxide is a racing additive that helps the engine make more power. It’s used to get a short, strong performance boost.
Nitrous oxide (often called “NOS”) is a chemical oxidizer used in racing to increase the amount of oxygen available for combustion. That allows more fuel to burn, producing a temporary boost in power.
straight jacket
"There's a championship alive. There's a difficulty, there's a straight jacket you put the teams in and they're trying, they're wriggling to try and get out of these straight jackets."
They’re comparing the rules to a straight jacket—something that restricts what teams can do. Teams still look for loopholes or clever ways to win while staying inside the limits.
A “straight jacket” here is a metaphor for restrictive regulations that limit what teams are allowed to do. Teams then try to “wriggle” within the rules to gain advantages without breaking them.
Mclaren 12
"entertained suddenly realize that it's not really what they thought it was, is how solid is that? That I can remember watching a McLaren 1-2 in Monaco once. And when I found out that they were playing team orders. Oh, on Hamilton. I remember being really annoyed. Because I thought,"
The McLaren 12C GT Sprint is a race version of the McLaren 12C. It’s made to be driven hard on a track, for shorter race events. People talk about it because it’s an example of how a regular performance car can be turned into a dedicated race car.
The McLaren 12C GT Sprint is a track-focused race car derived from the McLaren 12C, built for GT-style competition. It’s the kind of car that can come up in discussions because it shows how McLaren translated a road-car platform into a purpose-built racing package. The “GT Sprint” name points to a shorter, sprint-style racing format rather than endurance racing.
team orders
"That I can remember watching a McLaren 1-2 in Monaco once. And when I found out that they were playing team orders. Oh, on Hamilton."
Team orders are when a racing team tells one driver to let another driver win or to stop fighting. Fans sometimes feel it makes the race less exciting or less fair.
“Team orders” are instructions from an F1 team telling drivers how to race relative to each other—most commonly to hold position for a better team result. They can turn a battle for position into something fans perceive as less “real,” especially when the outcome feels predetermined.
Monaco
"That I can remember watching a McLaren 1-2 in Monaco once. And when I found out that they were playing team orders."
Monaco is a famous F1 race on very narrow streets where it’s hard to overtake. Because of that, strategy and team decisions can matter a lot.
Monaco refers to the Monaco Grand Prix venue, famous for tight streets, limited overtaking, and high dependence on qualifying and strategy. Because passing is so difficult, team decisions and race management can strongly shape what fans see.
Netflix
"We want everyone, more people to love the sport. It's gone across the Atlantic. And there's lots of new fans and Netflix has played its part."
Netflix is referenced as one reason more people started watching F1. The point is that some new fans may focus more on entertainment than the full details.
Netflix is mentioned as a media platform that helped grow Formula 1’s audience. The hosts connect its influence to the rise of entertainment-driven viewing and the resulting tension when fans want a simpler story.
Abu Dhabi
"Netflix has played its part. And of course, that coincided with Abu Dhabi, which was the big controversial event where you had got a lot of fans..."
Abu Dhabi is where a famous controversial F1 moment happened. The hosts are saying it changed how many fans felt about the sport.
Abu Dhabi is referenced here as the location of a major, controversial Formula 1 event that strongly affected fan sentiment. The discussion treats it as a turning point in how new audiences interpret what’s “fair” or “merit-based” in F1.
Lewis Hamilton
"And of course, that coincided with Abu Dhabi, which was the big controversial event where you had got a lot of fans, particularly Lewis Hamilton fans who knew to the sport, who were outraged."
Lewis Hamilton is a top Formula 1 driver and a major star of the sport. The hosts mention him because his fans were especially upset during a controversial moment.
Lewis Hamilton is a British Formula 1 driver and one of the sport’s biggest stars, with multiple world championships. The segment references his fanbase and specific controversies as part of the discussion about how entertainment-focused audiences react to F1’s sporting outcomes.
regulation change
"But anyway, that did, that did, but eventually they had to put a stop [1437.7s] to it. They were going, you can't be losing viewers. [1440.3s] Yes, yeah. So they did a regulation change."
A regulation change means the sport changed the rules. In this case, it affected when teams were allowed to change tires, which can completely change race strategy.
A regulation change is a rule update that changes how teams can operate in Formula 1. Here, the rules were adjusted to limit when teams could change tires, which directly affected race strategy and competitiveness.
can't change tyres
"So they did a regulation change. They said, right, you can't change tyres, [1445.6s] knowing that the Bridgestones that the Ferraris were on didn't last as long as the [1451.2s] Michelins that the competition was on."
“Can’t change tyres” means teams weren’t allowed to swap tires during the race. That makes tires last longer, so teams have to drive and plan around tire wear.
“Can’t change tyres” refers to a Formula 1 rule limiting or banning mid-race tire changes. That forces teams to manage tire wear and performance over longer stints, making tire choice and durability a major competitive factor.
Bridgestones
"They said, right, you can't change tyres, [1445.6s] knowing that the Bridgestones that the Ferraris were on didn't last as long as the [1451.2s] Michelins that the competition was on."
Bridgestone makes racing tires used in Formula 1. Here, the point is that their tires wore out sooner than the other brand, hurting teams when the rules stopped teams from swapping tires.
Bridgestone is a tire manufacturer that has supplied Formula 1 teams. In this segment, Bridgestone tires are described as not lasting as long as the Michelin tires, which contributed to Ferrari’s struggles under the “no tire changes” rule.
Michelins
"knowing that the Bridgestones that the Ferraris were on didn't last as long as the [1451.2s] Michelins that the competition was on. [1456.5s] So bad that, you know, they had to legislate again."
Michelin makes racing tires used in Formula 1. In this story, Michelin tires lasted longer, which mattered a lot when teams weren’t allowed to change tires during the race.
Michelin is a tire manufacturer that has also supplied Formula 1 teams. The segment claims Michelin tires lasted longer than Bridgestone under the limited tire-change rules, helping the competition and contributing to Ferrari’s “terrible season in 2005.”
legislate again
"So bad that, you know, they had to legislate again. [1460.9s] The following says, [1460.9s] yeah, you can do tyres now that Bridgestones had a chance to do a proper tyre and Ferrari"
“Legislate again” just means they changed the rules again. They did it because the earlier tire rules caused problems for teams and the season didn’t go as expected.
“Legislate again” means the sport introduced another rule change after the first one caused unintended consequences. Here, the speaker says F1 had to adjust the tire rules again because one tire brand performed poorly under the earlier constraints.
you can do tyres now
"The following says, [1460.9s] yeah, you can do tyres now that Bridgestones had a chance to do a proper tyre and Ferrari [1464.7s] will back again."
“You can do tyres now” means teams were allowed to use tires differently again—likely including changing them. The idea is that after the rule shift, the tire maker could improve the tire and teams got back on track.
“You can do tyres now” refers to restoring or allowing tire changes after the earlier restriction. The speaker frames it as giving Bridgestone time to develop a more competitive tire, which helped Ferrari recover after the 2005 downturn.
Kimi Antonelli
"we had Kimi Antonelli winning five races in a row. And everybody loves that, but it's new."
Kimi Antonelli is an F1 driver. The speaker mentions him because he’s described as winning many races in a row, and they’re debating how long that kind of dominance stays entertaining.
Kimi Antonelli is a Formula 1 driver discussed here as winning “five races in a row,” creating a compelling storyline. The speaker’s argument is that while streaks are exciting at first, repeated championships can eventually reduce audience interest.
level playing field
"because the FIA's job is to make it a level playing field and also to prescribe the technical boundaries."
“Level playing field” in F1 means designing rules so no single team can dominate purely through superior resources or loopholes. The speaker argues that when the FIA both sets technical boundaries and then penalizes teams for excelling, it can undermine the natural incentive to race for performance.
Sport or entertainment?
"I was just thinking about... the FIA's job is to make it a level playing field... But they're in the position now of saying, we're going to penalise you if you do too well."
They’re debating whether F1 should be run like a sport first (fair competition) or like entertainment first (keeping things unpredictable). The discussion centers on how rules and penalties affect that balance.
This segment is a debate about whether Formula 1 should prioritize sporting fairness and pure competition or treat the show as entertainment that must stay unpredictable. The speaker connects FIA rule-setting and penalties to the idea that the sport’s incentives may be shifting away from racing for outright performance.
penalise you if you do too well
"But they're in the position now of saying, we're going to penalise you if you do too well."
The speaker is talking about rules that can punish teams for being too successful. Instead of just rewarding speed within the rules, the sport may try to slow the leaders down so the racing stays closer.
This refers to a regulatory approach where teams can be punished for outperforming the field, rather than only for rule violations. In F1, that can show up as performance-balancing measures or rule changes that effectively reduce the advantage of the fastest teams, raising questions about whether the sport is being run as competition or entertainment-first.
Bernie
"I mean, when Bernie pulls out his fan car for realising he's going to destroy the championship back in 1978."
This is talking about Bernie Ecclestone, who ran Formula 1’s business side for decades. The point here is that he sometimes made choices to keep the championship from becoming too one-sided.
“Bernie” refers to Bernie Ecclestone, the long-time Formula 1 commercial boss. In 1978 he made decisions to protect the championship from being effectively “destroyed” by one team’s dominance, which the speaker frames as an early example of balancing entertainment and competitive fairness.
energy allowance
"energy allowance. And whether it was fuel or whatever, you can't, you have to produce something."
F1 has rules that limit how much energy the car can use during a race. It’s meant to keep teams from getting an unfair advantage just by using more energy than everyone else.
In Formula 1, an energy allowance is a limit on how much usable energy a car can deploy over a period (often tied to hybrid systems). The point is to cap total energy use so teams can’t just “buy” speed with unlimited power deployment.
double diffuser
"Or a double, a double diffuser situation where you said the rules of this and then. I thought you said that wasn't allowed."
A double diffuser is a shape at the back of an F1 car that helps the air flowing underneath the car. Better airflow under the car can create more grip (downforce) so the car can go faster through corners.
A double diffuser is an aerodynamic device at the rear of an F1 car that helps manage airflow under the car to increase downforce. It became famous because teams used it to extract more performance from the floor and exhaust/underbody airflow.
Brabham
"for example, if you think back to 92, 93, when you're in the Brabham and then you're in the Williams, you didn't suddenly become seven seconds a lap faster, did you?"
Brabham is an F1 racing team. Here it’s mentioned as an example of a time when the cars/teams were much closer or farther apart in speed than later.
Brabham is a Formula 1 team (founded by Jack Brabham) known for building and racing its own cars in the sport’s earlier decades. In this discussion, “Brabham” is used as a shorthand for a specific era of F1 competitiveness, comparing lap-time gaps across seasons.
Williams
"for example, if you think back to 92, 93, when you're in the Brabham and then you're in the Williams, you didn't suddenly become seven seconds a lap faster, did you?"
Williams is a famous Formula 1 team. The host is using it as an example to show that switching teams doesn’t instantly make you dramatically faster.
Williams is a Formula 1 team with a long history of winning championships, especially in the late 20th century. In this segment, “Williams” is used to illustrate how changing teams didn’t automatically translate into massive lap-time improvements.
refuelling
"the order makes, they exactly the same, but the difference is money. And it's a bit like when they had the problem with refuelling was that people drove at exact, at the maximum pace from qualifying"
Refuelling means topping up the fuel during the race. The point here is that if everyone can just drive flat-out the whole time, the race becomes less interesting because there’s less need to change pace or strategy.
In F1, refuelling refers to adding fuel during a race (a practice that existed in earlier eras). The segment argues that if teams and drivers can run at the maximum pace for the whole event, the race becomes less dynamic because strategy and pace changes are minimized.
qualifying
"people drove at exact, at the maximum pace from qualifying through the race, through to the end. So nothing ever changed."
Qualifying is when drivers race to decide where they start for the main race. The host is saying that if qualifying and race conditions end up too similar, the race doesn’t change much.
Qualifying is the session where F1 cars set their starting positions for the race. This segment contrasts qualifying pace with race pace, suggesting that if the rules make the car’s performance too predictable, the race can become a “race distance” repeat of qualifying rather than something that evolves.
sprinklers
"It was dreadful. But so it's giving, I mean, Bernie famously said, you know, we should have sprinklers and in a sudden rain, rain shower"
Sprinklers would be a way to make the track wet on purpose. The concern is that it would give too much power to the person controlling it, rather than letting racing and strategy decide outcomes.
“Sprinklers” here refers to an artificial system to deliberately create rain during a race. The argument is that this would add too much control to whoever operates the system, undermining the sporting balance and the natural unpredictability of weather.
rain shower
"we should have sprinklers and in a sudden rain, rain shower, which we, but of course that's a good example, because if that's an artificial thing at some point between the start and the finish,"
A rain shower is a brief burst of rain. In F1, that can quickly change how slippery the track is, which affects tires and strategy.
A “rain shower” is a short, localized period of rainfall that can rapidly change grip levels and tire performance in F1. In this segment, it’s used as an example of how artificial weather timing could be used to shake up the race—but also why that kind of control is problematic.
Request an Explanation
Heard something you'd like explained? We'll add it to this episode.
Sign in to request explanations for terms you heard.
Want to learn more?
Browse our glossary for plain-English explanations of automotive terms, jargon, and concepts.
Help improve this episode
See something that's not quite right? Our annotations are AI-generated and can sometimes miss the mark. Click the flag icon on any annotation to suggest a correction.