H elmut Marko experienced the bad years of motorsport himself. The 73-year-old from Graz drove Formula 1 and sports car races at a time when death was still a constant companion. In 1971 he won the Le Mans 24 Hours in a Porsche 917. Only afterwards was he told that the chassis was made of the highly flammable magnesium. No driver of today's generation would sit in such a car.
Marko is one of the greatest critics of the regulation mania in motorsport. In his opinion, fewer rules would be more. According to Marko, the Mexican GP is the best example of how penalties and endless discussions in the stewards' room damage sport. “The last four laps of the Grand Prix were the best of the whole season. And what are we talking about? Penalties, protests, appeals two weeks late. This is how the sport gets ruined. Let the drivers go. Then good sport comes out of it. ”
Routing should punish short cuts
For Marko, the problem begins with the tiresome discussion about the route limits. “We need a route that automatically penalizes anyone who leaves the route. Gravel beds, artificial harassment in the run-off zones like in Monza, no matter what. Then we need not talk about whether Hamilton or Verstappen were rightly punished or not. If there is a gravel bed, the Hamilton comes out in sixth or seventh place. Either because he is losing too much time or has dirt on his tires. ”
The discussions with the Vettel case against Ricciardo are also a joke, according to Marko. Even if they helped Ricciardo to third place in the end. Marko was an opponent of the reinterpretation of the overtaking rules from the start. “We don't need rules for duels. The drivers should agree that among themselves. And if they go too far, they punish themselves too. If you have an accident, you won't get there. Ricciardo and Vettel are the best example. They punished themselves with their duel for falling so far behind Verstappen that they can no longer catch up with him. They'll be more careful next time. You don't have to intervene from outside. ”