The history of Formula One is basically a story of people's attempts to go faster than everyone else in the race who is trying to go fast.

And that's all very well, except that the cars have got faster and faster, while the human body has basically remained the same. As we've seen in the IndyCar and Indy Racing League series this year and in F1 in recent years, when technology goes rampant, someone inevitably gets hurt.

So the calls for the cars to be slowed down. And fair enough.

It's quite interesting to flip through a record book and look at the speeds at a few circuits. What I'm talking about here is the fastest lap during that year's race.

First of all, let's be sure that we all understand that the rules have changed many times even since 1950. Engine displacement has varied greatly; turbocharging was permitted for many years, before being banned; the weight of the car was forced up, then down and then up again; fuel consumption was free, then restricted then free again.

Then you look at the races at Monza. Actually, it would be better if you graphed it: the line would show increasing speed overall, but with occasional dips where "slow down" legislation had come into place.

The point here is that, despite every effort of the legislators, F1 racing gets faster and faster: it's the name of the game.

Over those years, we've seen many changes in the technology of the cars. Refueling, tyres, wings, ground-effects, electronics and so on. In the Hungarian issue of Atlas, in his article "Waiting For The Silly Season", Michael Whitfield put forward the thesis that electronics were banned in cars covertly because Williams was winning too often (thereby reducing the "entertainment value") and overtly because there was a move towards drivers driving the cars.

And yet today, despite all the regulations, the cars get faster and faster, and more and more decisions are taken away from the driver.

I have an idea that will: slow the cars down; be safer for the pit crews; reinstate the driver as the prime tactician; and may make the races more interesting.

It's simple: free pit stops for fuel or tyres are banned. Well, we might as well say that free pit stops are banned.

No refueling would seem to be almost reasonable on safety grounds. Many fans dislike it, pit crews loathe it. For me, refueling turns a single race into a series of sprints, which is not what F1 racing is about. There would be safety issues, for sure, but refueling is a recent phenomenon, so it wouldn't be too much of a "step back" to ban it.

Some people might say that banning refueling would turn F1 races into economy runs, and to a certain extent, I would agree. It would certainly put pressure on the driver to think about how he is running a race. While there would still be "advice" from the pits, it would be the driver's decision about how rich or lean to run the engine.

Please note that I have not advocated limiting the size of the fuel tanks. This would impose a problem for the designer of the car and the builder of the engine in deciding how large a fuel tank to fit for each race.

It would also pose an additional problem for the driver and the designer because the car's balance would change as the race progressed. The driver would have to alter his style as the balance changed. The better driver would be able to do this, while the not-so-good driver would find that he could not drive the car any more.

Tyre selection and tyre usage would become crucial. Choose the wrong tyre for the race, and you might as well not even bother racing. Use the tyres too harshly early in the race, and there may not be any tyre left by the end of the race. This will come down to driver and designer ability: the driver's ability to preserve the tyres as much as necessary; and the designer's ability to design a chassis that doesn't use the tyres too much. And, once again, the driver's ability to adapt to the changing conditions of his tyres as the race progresses would be tested.

Naturally, I am not suggesting that all tyre stops are banned. Changing weather conditions could well mean that a race could start dry and become wet. In this situation, wet tyres would be free. However, if the driver wants to return to dry tyres, he has to go back to the ones that he was using originally.

What happens if you get a puncture? Tough. You're out of the race. So this should cause the teams to put pressure on the tyre companies to ensure that the tyres are strong enough to last a full race.

As a side issue, using only one set of dry tyres for each race would also help reduce costs for many teams. Tyres may not be a hugely significant part of a team's budget, but they are a part and anything that would allow them to channel money to other areas should not be sneered at.

Fuel limitations (what liquid is left in the tank) and tyre limitations (what rubber is left on the carcass) would certainly cause the drivers to slow down.

But that's just me.