Earlier this week Flavio Briatore (pictured) brought up the three-car team conundrum again - but would F1 benefit from more front-runners instead of the new backmarker teams or would it damage the sport?
Ever since Ferrari posted the enticing idea of putting Michael Schumacher alongside Kimi Raikkonen and Felipe Massa last year, talk of third cars for leading teams has been on the radar. It was discussed. Dismissed. But it has never died.
Now, with the new teams struggling to perform, it begs the question whether the sport should have built up its numbers from the front rather than the back?
At the last race, in Shanghai, all six new cars were at the back in qualifying with the fastest of them a full 4.7s off the pace and the slowest just over 6s down. In the race, the fastest new team in the race was Lotus, but their lead car was five seconds off the pace.
It has been interesting to watch them battling to overcome their struggles at the back as a side story, but it's hard to argue against the suggestion that an additional Red Bull, Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren would add more value.
When originally tabled it was Ferrari pushing for Schumacher but it morphed into a plan to give youngsters an 'in' at the front. All the top teams are either grooming young drivers or have connections with interesting stars from other series with no F1 experience - so why not give them a run in F1?
Imagine it. Valentino Rossi, a MotoGP champion but F1 rookie joining Ferrari to take on F1 title winner Alonso; young hot shot Daniel Ricciardo joining Red Bull to try and show up old hand Mark Webber; Oliver Turvey in at McLaren to complete a all-British three-driver line-up; maybe even Suzie Stoddart joining Mercedes as the first F1 woman for decades...
It all seems a bit more appealing than seeing a great name like Senna (Bruno) unable to show his true speed and struggling to make it all the way to the end of a Grand Prix thanks to reliability problems with his Hispania car; or a respected name like Jarno Trulli slowly tearing his hair out in his Lotus on a circuit where just one year previously he was sitting on pole position.
There is, of course, one big argument against: it would mean less chance for the established smaller teams, for example Force India this year, to rise up the ranks.
Although McLaren and Ferrari have been a constant (apart from the year McLaren was disqualified from top spot), the top four has had eight different members over the last five years and has also included Red Bull, Mercedes/Brawn/Honda, BMW/Sauber, Renault, Williams and Toyota.
Briatore argued that the "lack of spectacle and unpredictability under normal conditions" means F1 needs to strengthen itself by making the leading teams a greater focus.
Maybe. But would he have argued the case when he was at Renault if his team was not one of the chosen few? Sauber, Renault and Williams are still on the grid, yet they are no longer in the top four. Not long ago, they were.
So the problem is, while three-car teams may produce front-running competition, which 'top teams' should you choose...?