to my knowledge banning ground effect devices and geometries has been a decades long game of cat and mouse which at virtually no point has resulted in an on the track reality of equal footing due to a complete absence of positive traction from active or passive ground effect features on all cars
just about every race I've ever watched has featured that year's aero controversy front and center in the commentary
F1 has been as much about engineers racing the rules as drivers racing the cars as long as I've been watching
Well, they are prototypes. Every car is different so Formula 1 has always been more about the car than about the driver, despite the hype being more about drivers.
A good driver can get closer to the limit of the car than a worse one, that's right. However if the limit of another car is 1 second better, even with an average driver that faster car is going to win against the slower one with the good driver.
So to win titles: build a very good car, hire a good driver (which will be more than happy to come), possibly win driving with one arm like Schumacher, Hamilton and Verstappen did in many of the last 20 years. But even without a star you're going to win anyway if the car is good enough. Williams won with Damon Hill, Ferrari almost won with Irvine in 1999 when Schumacher missed many races for injury.
to my knowledge banning ground effect devices and geometries has been a decades long game of cat and mouse which at virtually no point has resulted in an on the track reality of equal footing due to a complete absence of positive traction from active or passive ground effect features on all cars
just about every race I've ever watched has featured that year's aero controversy front and center in the commentary
F1 has been as much about engineers racing the rules as drivers racing the cars as long as I've been watching