Is F1 Real Racing Anymore?

[steveaki13]

A question I saw on the BBC website and I have thought about it for the last couple of years.

I have to say that todays race was a long time low light after years of watching F1.

For me real racing is anything pre 2010.

The last 2 years of F1 has made me feel sad for a sport I love.
All the aspects of F1 I have gotten excited about over the years seem to have slipped away in order to promote "the show" to moron fans who need a pass every corner to enjoy F1.

I was so angry after watching the race last week and now todays.

F1 was the pinicle of motorsport but I worry its becoming the Joke of Motorsport.

The Tyres are not helping with drivers no longer able to race for more than 5-10 laps of a race. Meaningless DRS overtakes mean nothing to me, yet this seems F1's main aim. That this short cut solution to the aero problems will appease fans.

F1 was brilliant for me for so many reasons, F1 Racing is about teams builing cars in lots of different ways, with Engines that perform at top whack. No rev limits, F1 is drivers driving as fast as they can to be the fastest, it was about passes late on the brakes all locked up and swarming battles of 3 or 4 cars weaving around battling hard, drivers Defending with all they are worth against a guy in a faster car to hold onto a decent result.

F1 has issues that make it seem now like a sport made to provide punters with wall to wall entertainment rather than provide them with high quality racing and top sport. Which in itself should be entertaining enough.

For me DRS needs to go as it is only a short cut to save having to look at the real aero issues which if solved would see racing get closer and following and passing become easier.

The main gripe I have with DRS is its unfair. If 2 drivers battle without DRS one passes the other can defend on an even level except for slipstream, then straight away the 2nd driver can use slipstream to repass or fight back. Now a driver is passed with DRS and thats it. No defense and no chance to fight back until next lap.


All in all F1 needs to remember that real Racing doesnt mean passing all the time, but quality drivers in quality cars battling hard. A race can be exciting with few passes but lots of battling and great defensive driving.

But today at Monaco we saw all the wrong things. F1 becoming such a conservative sport in terms of tyres, Engines & gearboxes and thus allowing no drivers to race.


F1 needs to change. Otherwise I may not be able to watch it much longer.

[wedge]

Thanks to Pirelli I have recently questioned my enthusiasm for F1.

I am close to the end of my tether but F1 drags me back because it is *supposedly* the pinnacle.

I specifically remember the likes of Whitmarsh saying that Pandora's Box wasn't supposed to be gimmicky and numerous overtakes and now they - Whitmarsh being one them - just can't get enough of it.

The likes of Gary Anderson who think one/two stop races are boring and don't create enough of a spectacle - sorry but with the rights tyres this was possible last year in Italy and Austin.

[Rollo]

If I was Grand Poobah and Lord High Everything Else, I'd seriously consider removing wings altogether (HA! Take that DRS) and make tyre companies produce a tyre capable of lasting the whole race.

I've always thought that wings on cars are hokey. I'd rather see cars skate about and drivers fight with actual mechanical grip of the tyres than push some button because they want to get past.
If no-one had wings, there wouldn't need to be DRS. If tyre companies were asked to produce a tyre which lasted a whole race, they would - they used to do it in the past.

[dj_bytedisaster]

As with everything there can be too much of something. Today we have too much artificial show. There was a time, when we had to endure Spanish GP's at Barcelona with a single on-track overtaking move all race. That was because the cars were so littered with bits an pieces bolted to it that they caused massive wake turbulence, effectively preventing another car to get near let alone overtake. On top of that Ferrari had invented something called reliability. Back in 1996 there was a joke in Germany: Henry Maske (boxer) is better than Schumi's Ferrari, because Maske goes over 12 rounds. (round and lap are the same word in German). 10 years later Ferraris and other cars simply didn't break down anymore. No more Minardis scraping a point because everyone else had gone up in flames. Hell there wasn't even Minardi anymore.
So the powers that be started to fiddle with the product. Problem was, they were a proctologist trying to cure a sore throat. First they made the cars ugly by mandating the ridiculously wide front wings and the puny rear wings completely putting the car's dimensions out of whack. This of course didn't cure the aero problems, but it gave us many a sliced rear wheel tyre. Then they wanted to bring back mechanical retirements by mandating engines and gearboxes to last a decade. That, however didn't bring back retirements, but it gave us teams calculating how fast they can go to make it to the next allowed engine change. Ever since then drivers start to 'pace manage' as soon as they are in the lead. Keep a 5-8 second gap and nurse the engine, tires and whatnot. No more Schumi lapping all but three drivers in torrential rain or Alonso winning by half a week. It's all about conservation now.
The ultimate insult however was the arrival of Pirelli. Asked to fiddle with the show they produced "tyres" that are deliberately crap and each year's generation is more crap than the year before. This is how the 'FIA Formula One World Championship' became the 'Greenpeace presents the G-Wizz delta-time Masters Series de-boned by Pirelli'.

What we need is to bring the old F1 back. Let the manufaturers decide how long they want their engines to last or how high they want them to rev. Award points for the fastest lap and the pole position and get back to awarding points to the first 6 places only. That'll be all encouragement the teams need to let their drivers go fast instead of tootling about 5 seconds off-pace deliberately, like shown in Monaco and Barcelona.

Vettels exchange with the Muftis behind the pitwall after his fastest lap (that was 4 seconds faster than what he had been driving for the few laps beforehand) pretty much summed it up. He got a ticking off because he went too fast and was reminded that there are no points for fastest laps. His sullen reply: "But it gives me the satisfaction".

That's what F1 is these days. Deeply unsatisfactory for both drivers and spectators - a bling-bling, but hollow shell of what it once was. NASCAR with engine technology from the correct century.

[faster69]

It has really changed much. You wouldn't call a wet weather race artificial because drivers have to drive within themselves. The drivers have to adapt to the changing conditions throughout the race.

[ShiftingGears]

It has really changed much. You wouldn't call a wet weather race artificial because drivers have to drive within themselves.

That isn't a valid comparison. In wet races when the lap times are much slower, drivers would be pushing the cars as close as they dared to the traction limit of the tyres.

That is not what we saw for most of yesterday.

[N. Jones]

For me it's the tires. Let teams run whatever tire they want. Sadly this started when Bridgestone was the only supplier and they cried of becoming "irrelevant".
GOOD! That is what you SHOULD be! Let the drivers show us their skills at driving, not being nursemaids to four pieces of "rubber".

Get rid of this and the show will be better.

DRS, I can handle it.

[wmcot]

There was a time when F1 was about innovation, designing the fastest/best handling car, allowing as many pitstops (or not) as you chose, teams choosing what fuel loads to run, how long their engine lasted, and on and on...

Now we have a contest to see who can design a car that is easier on its tires. Plus you have to run both good and crappy tires during each race.

It seems to be more like running the Olympic 4x100 relay with the first 3 runners barefoot on sharp stones and the last runner being a pathetically inferior runner. That would "even up" the competition in the Olympics!

Do I still watch F1? Yeah. Do I enjoy it as much? No!

[henners88]

The FIA need to admit they got it wrong this season. Pirelli are getting the bad reputation and I don't think that is entirely fair.

[steveaki13]

Wow my 3000th Post.

What a milestone. :p

Who would have thought I would make 3000 before Henners. ;)

Im so excited :bounce:

Cheers Guys :beer:

Keep up the good work. :up:

[steveaki13]

Anyway.

I think FIA need to think hard about where F1 will be in 10-20-50 years

If it goes "The Show" route it may suffer in 10 years

If it goes "The Sport" Route F1 will continue after us.

[BDunnell]

The FIA need to admit they got it wrong this season. Pirelli are getting the bad reputation and I don't think that is entirely fair.

I'm not sure Jean Todt does that. Come to think of it, I'm starting to be unsure whether he does anything.

[BDunnell]

Question. Can modern F1 truly be entertaining (excluding wet races) without artificial elements like deliberately crap tyres and DRS? I have my doubts.

[steveaki13]

Sad as it is. Thats a key question.

However if the Question was, Could modern F1 being an entertaining sport without crap tyres and DRS? Then my answer would be yes.

If those in control were willing to take some serious action to change the sport and the regulations to limit aero effects and ease restrictions.

However until F1 is willing to have the biggest reg changes for a while, nothing will change

[steveaki13]

Who would have thought I would make 3000 before Henners. ;)



Doh

Now noticed Henners is restored to his former post glory.

Well done Henners back as you belong.

[Koz]

What we need is to bring back refueling.

[Duncan]

There's definitely a list of things that just seem completely out of place. I understand what the changes were supposed to bring about, but it just makes the whole thing artificial instead of the "balls to the wall" F1 racing that I remember from way back...

DRS: please, please get rid of this monstrosity. I just don't see the attraction. What's the point of increasing the number of overtaking maneuvers when we all know that they're fake?

T{i|y}res: Something has just gone horribly wrong with whatever the plan was here. Get rid of the "must use both compounds" rule and let t{i|y}re manufacturers compete to produce whatever they think will work best. Who knows what they'll be able to come up with?

Refueling: I understand that there's a significant safety angle here, but it just doesn't seem that unmanageable. Refueling gave the teams much more to play with in terms of strategy, and it seemed to me to be an important element of the whole race-watching experience.

In general, ugh. Something really has to change here.

[faster69]

The sport is far more exciting than 10 years ago and I'm saying that as a Schumacher fan that followed his entire F1 career.

[henners88]

Doh

Now noticed Henners is restored to his former post glory.

Well done Henners back as you belong.
I found them under my bed. They were there all along. :)

[zako85]

The main gripe I have with DRS is its unfair. If 2 drivers battle without DRS one passes the other can defend on an even level except for slipstream, then straight away the 2nd driver can use slipstream to repass or fight back. Now a driver is passed with DRS and thats it. No defense and no chance to fight back until next lap.


I don't understand this. When a DRS-enabled pass happens, most of the time its at the end of the main straightway, so there is no way the losing driver could possibly slipstream and repass back. I also would like to mention that DRS does not always make passes trivial. There are plenty of examples. Just looks at the last Monaco race. The race track isn't that slow. The cars can still use the highest gear and hit speeds over 170mph, yet passing was so hard. There are many other examples.

Finally, DRS is not completely unfair. If you're the leading car, you can still fight and defend. For example, by keeping the following car more than a second behind. Let's be honest, if the following car is glued to the rear end the whole time, then it is the faster car, and the only reason it's behind is that the front car is blocking it in some way. Granted, there are race tracks and races where DRS made the overtakes look completely fake, but I don't remember the specific cases they were, but they exist. The system is not perfect, but it works IMHO.

I do hate the tire situation though. In my opinion there needs to be a tire supplier competition so that the tire supplier is concerned with how to complete the race in the least time possible instead of how to crease an exciting show. Once there is tire competition, the tire supplier will work closely with the leading team and will provide the tire that this team needs to win the race, however few or many pit stops this team needs. Making a tire that forces a pit stop just for the show is just wrong. I could care less about the "excitement" that this causes.

[Bezza]

I think Spain and Monaco have proved that is come too far now.

It is too much about the tyres, and has been for the last few years. Granted, we’ve had good races, and I always watch them still – indeed I enjoyed the Monaco GP but not in the classic way I should be.

Drivers should be going flat out whenever possible. There has always been an element of tyre preservation, car preservation etc – but right now the tyres barely last a few laps before “falling off a cliff”. It is all about the tyres, when it should be about the racing. Drivers racing as fast as possible. With this, you will get boring races – but this tends to happen at boring tracks. Races like Canada, Silverstone, Spa always produced excellent races regardless of any of this fancy crap.

I like KERS. There is method to it in terms of when to use it to attack and when to defend. It engages the drivers brain and gives them something else to worry about.

I do not like DRS. It has taken me a while to decide, but I think it is un-necessary. It makes difficult but possible passes easy. They shouldn’t be easy. They should just be possible.

Effectively it was only brought in because of the 2010 Abu Dhabi race when Alonso lost the championship stuck behind Petrov. But that was Ferrari’s fault for a humungous tactical cock-up!

2014 we are getting a whole raft of changes, including turbo-charged engines?? (am I right or did I dream this?) – therefore I don’t see a need for DRS.

Pirelli know how bad the situation is now, so I’m confident they will fix this and bring back stronger tyres which can last a realistic amount of time.

[SGWilko]

The biggest issue has been the FIA requesting Pirelli to recreate something that was a one-off. It all kicked off due to the Bridgestone tyres and the track breaking up in Canada many moons ago. As it was unexpected, the strategists could not plan to drive at a percentage, because the other team strategists were in the same boat.

With the teams all now knowing how the tyres will behave, rather than going flat out and accepting there will be more pit stops (that was what we had in Canada and everyone creamed in their kecks over it so good was it that day) they all decided that a game of chess was how they should play it from now on.

I don't see there is any blame to be put on Pirelli's shoulders at all.

[jens]

I agree that Barcelona was underwhelming, but I genuinely enjoyed Monaco due to the circumstances. Why? Because we had something like 10 or more cars in the train, who were constantly looking for a way through. Remember Webber-Hamilton? Pérez, Sutil, Button, others. Di Resta was all over Vergne.

You can just try to imagine, how hard it is to drive defensively for the whole race and not lose focus and crash. Or even more so, how hard it is to both attack and defend and keep your nose clean in the middle of the pack. I was just enjoying the incredible skills of the racing drivers there.

I wouldn't mind if they are 3 secs off the pace if they showcase their racing skills in such ways. But I know Monaco is a unique circuit and it's not gonna work like that in the future.

[steveaki13]

Because we had something like 10 or more cars in the train, who were constantly looking for a way through. Remember Webber-Hamilton? Pérez, Sutil, Button, others. Di Resta was all over Vergne.

.

Sorry Jens. I disagree with this.

I never felt from Lap 3 to about 30 or whenever the stops started, that any drivers were looking for a way past. I saw it as the drivers being told by teams, that after the chaos of the first couple of laps the drivers should stay 2 seconds behind the car in front. This happened with nearly every car. 2 seconds between cars.

[jens]

Sorry Jens. I disagree with this.

I never felt from Lap 3 to about 30 or whenever the stops started, that any drivers were looking for a way past. I saw it as the drivers being told by teams, that after the chaos of the first couple of laps the drivers should stay 2 seconds behind the car in front. This happened with nearly every car. 2 seconds between cars.

Well, okay... You may have a point about pre-pitstop period. But even then the gaps were small. If I remember correctly, 12th car lost about 14 seconds around lap 20. And commentators were discussing, how can the leaders pit if they all get thrown into traffic.

So this was an exciting period to me as well. For how long can they nurse those supersoft tyres - do they completely go off? When to make a pitstop? Because with the field being so tight, you can easily get held up after the pitstop, yet you can't go on forever.

Sorry, but I just found the race exciting all-around. Just my mindset of finding and looking for positives and excitement in anything you can. Better than complaining and concentrating on the negative. :)

We must never forget the big picture. The most boring race I can remember was Hungary 2004. This was the one I literally couldn't watch, I switched TV channel. Compared to that Monaco 2013 was a luxury. Got to enjoy. :)

[steveaki13]

Well, okay... You may have a point about pre-pitstop period. But even then the gaps were small. If I remember correctly, 12th car lost about 14 seconds around lap 20. And commentators were discussing, how can the leaders pit if they all get thrown into traffic.

So this was an exciting period to me as well. For how long can they nurse those supersoft tyres - do they completely go off? When to make a pitstop? Because with the field being so tight, you can easily get held up after the pitstop, yet you can't go on forever.

Sorry, but I just found the race exciting all-around. Just my mindset of finding and looking for positives and excitement in anything you can. Better than complaining and concentrating on the negative. :)

We must never forget the big picture. The most boring race I can remember was Hungary 2004. This was the one I literally couldn't watch, I switched TV channel. Compared to that Monaco 2013 was a luxury. Got to enjoy. :)

Well said.

I didnt enjoy the first stint, but after that it became an interesting Monaco GP.

I normally can do the same in terms of finding most races interesting in some way. It was just it disturbed me that the teams were almost telling drivers not to try, which is different from a normal dull race, where people are trying but nothing is happening.

This first stint went beyond a dull race into something funamentally flawed

[dj_bytedisaster]

The whole race was a farce. When the Merc engineer radioed Nico that 'your pace management is good', I felt like breaking something. Seeing van der Gaarde stomp in the fastest lap would have been hilarious if it didn't expose just what a huge ridiculous mess it had been. Monaco was too much even for some of the pundits, who so far were stubborn defenders of F1's new 'show elements'. That's saying a lot and I don't think this one will go unheard even by the change alergics in the FIA bunker.

[Knock-on]

F1 is very different now to 20 years ago but change (progress??) will always happen in a technological sport.

If it were up to me, I would give each team a box that the car must fit in, a set amount of fuel that is the only fuel that can be physically added for the race and let them get on with it: KERS, solar, DRS whatever. Let them innovate.

[SGWilko]

The whole race was a farce. When the Merc engineer radioed Nico that 'your pace management is good', I felt like breaking something. Seeing van der Gaarde stomp in the fastest lap would have been hilarious if it didn't expose just what a huge ridiculous mess it had been. Monaco was too much even for some of the pundits, who so far were stubborn defenders of F1's new 'show elements'. That's saying a lot and I don't think this one will go unheard even by the change alergics in the FIA bunker.

No-one was stopping the drivers and teams going 6 seconds faster than everyone else, building a massive gap, and making more stops. It is the strategists that are the problem, not the tyres.

[SGWilko]

F1 is very different now to 20 years ago but change (progress??) will always happen in a technological sport.

If it were up to me, I would give each team a box that the car must fit in, a set amount of fuel that is the only fuel that can be physically added for the race and let them get on with it: KERS, solar, DRS whatever. Let them innovate.

Could they agree on the definition of a box though......? ;)

Also, with a 'set amount of fuel', you realise they will pay the likes of Shell gazillions to make their fuel much more dense.

In fact, if they could, they'd put 'moon dust stuff' in the sidepods if they thought it gained a tenth........

[dj_bytedisaster]

No-one was stopping the drivers and teams going 6 seconds faster than everyone else, building a massive gap, and making more stops. It is the strategists that are the problem, not the tyres.

Monaco was stopping them from doing that. The only one for whom it could have worked was Rosberg. Even at 4 seconds, overtaking isn't guaranteed in Monaco, so everyone going for a one-stopper was a foregone conclusion.
I can understand those that say conservation has always been part of F1, but usually drivers would reduce the pace for a few laps in the middle or towards the end, but not the entire race that's simply too much.

[denkimi]

imo it is very simple:

-turbo engines with only the displacement limited
-the amount of fuel unlimited
-gearboxes completely free
-no reliability demands for cars, thus no penalty if you blow up your engine or gearbox
-free choise off tyre type or manufacturer
-limited aero, only 2 wings and a maximum value for ground pressure (=weight) at 200 km/h
-ground effect
so basically, let them free so they can explore the edge and take risks.

and i almost forgot: more testing. give them 30 unlimited testing days so they can actually try things before races.


No-one was stopping the drivers and teams going 6 seconds faster than everyone else, building a massive gap, and making more stops. It is the strategists that are the problem, not the tyres.
you really think that none off the dozens or hundereds of very smart people that make up the teams ever thought about that option?
the layout of the monaco circuit makes such tactics impossible. one or more safetycars are a certainty, which would ruin such a strategy.

[yodasarmpit]

For those complaining about DRS, it may be worth considering the reason why it was introduced.
Current cars on current tracks were simply unable to follow closely through corners, making it near impossible to make a pass even when they were the faster car.

The options:
1. Make the track layouts different, widen them
2. Remove all aero as not to affect the following car
3. Introduce an artificial means of negating the adverse effect of the aero

The FIA selected to go with option 3.

[dj_bytedisaster]

For those complaining about DRS, it may be worth considering the reason why it was introduced.
Current cars on current tracks were simply unable to follow closely through corners, making it near impossible to make a pass even when they were the faster car.

The options:
1. Make the track layouts different, widen them
2. Remove all aero as not to affect the following car
3. Introduce an artificial means of negating the adverse effect of the aero

The FIA selected to go with option 3.

DRS in itself isn't really the problem. it's the implementation. First of all, the Driver who is in front has absolutely no means to defend. Shooting fish in a barrel is a form of fishing, just not a very useful one. Further, the difference between detection and DRS zone. They are usually a corner or two apart. If you somehow manage to overtake a driver between the detection point and the DRS zone, you can pull away with DRS, which is against the purpose of the exercise. On some tracks with long straights DRS passes are just too easy.

[ioan]

A question I saw on the BBC website and I have thought about it for the last couple of years.

I have to say that todays race was a long time low light after years of watching F1.

For me real racing is anything pre 2010.

The last 2 years of F1 has made me feel sad for a sport I love.
All the aspects of F1 I have gotten excited about over the years seem to have slipped away in order to promote "the show" to moron fans who need a pass every corner to enjoy F1.

I was so angry after watching the race last week and now todays.

F1 was the pinicle of motorsport but I worry its becoming the Joke of Motorsport.

The Tyres are not helping with drivers no longer able to race for more than 5-10 laps of a race. Meaningless DRS overtakes mean nothing to me, yet this seems F1's main aim. That this short cut solution to the aero problems will appease fans.

F1 was brilliant for me for so many reasons, F1 Racing is about teams builing cars in lots of different ways, with Engines that perform at top whack. No rev limits, F1 is drivers driving as fast as they can to be the fastest, it was about passes late on the brakes all locked up and swarming battles of 3 or 4 cars weaving around battling hard, drivers Defending with all they are worth against a guy in a faster car to hold onto a decent result.

F1 has issues that make it seem now like a sport made to provide punters with wall to wall entertainment rather than provide them with high quality racing and top sport. Which in itself should be entertaining enough.

For me DRS needs to go as it is only a short cut to save having to look at the real aero issues which if solved would see racing get closer and following and passing become easier.

The main gripe I have with DRS is its unfair. If 2 drivers battle without DRS one passes the other can defend on an even level except for slipstream, then straight away the 2nd driver can use slipstream to repass or fight back. Now a driver is passed with DRS and thats it. No defense and no chance to fight back until next lap.


All in all F1 needs to remember that real Racing doesnt mean passing all the time, but quality drivers in quality cars battling hard. A race can be exciting with few passes but lots of battling and great defensive driving.

But today at Monaco we saw all the wrong things. F1 becoming such a conservative sport in terms of tyres, Engines & gearboxes and thus allowing no drivers to race.


F1 needs to change. Otherwise I may not be able to watch it much longer.

This is what happens when you try to solve something that aint broken.
F1 decided to cater to the Joes and Janes that know nothing about racing, and this is the result we've got.
They went for KERS and DRS and chewing gum tires, all at the same time when any of these should have been enough, and if that wasn't enough they overdid the DRS and tire comedy.
DRS should be allowed for far shorter distance, it is not OK to come from 1 second behind and easily pass the other car before the braking area.
Also the tires. What the hell was that joke of a race in Spain?! 4 stops and still barely trying to push the cars?! Pirelli over did it by a mile, they got caught up in thinking that they will steal the lines if F1 becomes a show, only that some of the teams and drivers didn't like it. If Max was around now Pirelli would have been toast long time ago, just as Michelin were for much less.

Anyway F1 has it all now. Limited number of pre-homologated engines and gearboxes, KERS, DRS highway overtaking and self destructing tires! Even BE's previous sprinkler idea looks like the strike of a genius compared to this.

[BDunnell]

This is what happens when you try to solve something that aint broken.
F1 decided to cater to the Joes and Janes that know nothing about racing, and this is the result we've got.

There is a problem here, for although I agree with you, sport has to be entertaining — otherwise, what's the point in watching it? F1 was, too often, simply not entertaining; boring, even. Now it's gone too far in the other direction. Surely a balance can be struck somewhere.

[steveaki13]

I cant ever recall F1 actually being boring. Even in 92, 02, 04, 11 and the last race wasnt boring.

I dont think the currant rules for example are boring as such. More that they are just wrong.

[steveaki13]

For those complaining about DRS, it may be worth considering the reason why it was introduced.
Current cars on current tracks were simply unable to follow closely through corners, making it near impossible to make a pass even when they were the faster car.

The options:
1. Make the track layouts different, widen them
2. Remove all aero as not to affect the following car
3. Introduce an artificial means of negating the adverse effect of the aero

The FIA selected to go with option 3.

They should however have gone for something more option 2.

Not remove all, but make a limit on the aero teams can use. There must be a way of doing that, I am not clever enough to say how, but if they did then cars could follow, battle and pass without the lead driver being mugged everytime.

[steveaki13]

F1 is very different now to 20 years ago but change (progress??) will always happen in a technological sport.

If it were up to me, I would give each team a box that the car must fit in, a set amount of fuel that is the only fuel that can be physically added for the race and let them get on with it: KERS, solar, DRS whatever. Let them innovate.

This could be a good idea.

Would you limit DRS use, or make it like boosts in other series. i.e use it any time, or 8 times but at any time?

[Koz]

This could be a good idea.

Would you limit DRS use, or make it like boosts in other series. i.e use it any time, or 8 times but at any time?

DRS twice at any point on the lap as long as you are behind a car under 0.5 seconds?
Shouldn't work while lapping cars.

That would make it work.

[zako85]

For those complaining about DRS, it may be worth considering the reason why it was introduced.
Current cars on current tracks were simply unable to follow closely through corners, making it near impossible to make a pass even when they were the faster car.


But DRS doesn't fix this issue, does it? In a race without DRS, a faster car should not have issues overtaking when it's close enough on main straights due to drafting.

[steveaki13]

DRS twice at any point on the lap as long as you are behind a car under 0.5 seconds?
Shouldn't work while lapping cars.

That would make it work.

I agree with that. I wouldnt feel so frustrated about DRS if it was used something like this.

[giedriusr]

Well. There are advantages and disadvantages, but yeah, formula 1 becomes less and less interesting in terms of driver talent, etc..

[Knock-on]

Sorry Steve I haven't figured how to quote posts on mobile :dork:

However, DRS. Why would you limit it. Any teams can develop whatever system they want and use it wherever. Active suspension, 6 wheels, TC. I don't care.

Just let them play.

[steveaki13]

Sorry Steve I haven't figured how to quote posts on mobile :dork:

However, DRS. Why would you limit it. Any teams can develop whatever system they want and use it wherever. Active suspension, 6 wheels, TC. I don't care.

Just let them play.

No I agree.

They limit it now and its not good.

I suggest if we have DRS we have to let it be more unlimited.

[dj_bytedisaster]

No I agree.

They limit it now and its not good.

I suggest if we have DRS we have to let it be more unlimited.

But the day is already in the calender, when some nut would try to open the flap in Blanchimont and we'd witness a very nasty shunt.

[Whyzars]

There is a problem here, for although I agree with you, sport has to be entertaining — otherwise, what's the point in watching it? F1 was, too often, simply not entertaining; boring, even. Now it's gone too far in the other direction. Surely a balance can be struck somewhere.

Hollywood is about entertainment, sport is about competition. :)

Would any of us watch the Olympics if we knew that half the marathon field were on a rolling escalator and as soon as they get close to the leader they will sail on past?

If the result of a sporting event is pre-determined because of short term dominance then so be it. Eventually someone will come along that knocks the champ off his/her pedestal. That is sport.

The glitz and glamour used to be earned but now everyone is crying poor whilst spending half the budget of a small country on luxury and mobile homes. It seems to be more focused on keeping the exclusivity rather than continuing to earn it.

"Let them eat cake" comes to mind.

[faster69]

I agree that Barcelona was underwhelming, but I genuinely enjoyed Monaco due to the circumstances. Why? Because we had something like 10 or more cars in the train, who were constantly looking for a way through. Remember Webber-Hamilton? Pérez, Sutil, Button, others. Di Resta was all over Vergne.
Lucky you weren't watching races from Barcelona 10-15 years ago. Consistently was the one of the most boring races on the calendar (along with Monaco and Hungary) with passing almost impossible.

I enjoy F1 right now. Who can drive fastest without destroying their tyres. The best drivers still win.

[faster69]

imo it is very simple:

-turbo engines with only the displacement limited
-the amount of fuel unlimited
-gearboxes completely free
-no reliability demands for cars, thus no penalty if you blow up your engine or gearbox
-free choise off tyre type or manufacturer
-limited aero, only 2 wings and a maximum value for ground pressure (=weight) at 200 km/h
-ground effect
so basically, let them free so they can explore the edge and take risks.

and i almost forgot: more testing. give them 30 unlimited testing days so they can actually try things before races.


you really think that none off the dozens or hundereds of very smart people that make up the teams ever thought about that option?
the layout of the monaco circuit makes such tactics impossible. one or more safetycars are a certainty, which would ruin such a strategy.

The limits on engines, tyres, etc are to bring down costs in order to have a full grid. You're not just transporting everything from one tiny European country to another these days.

Also, there's the aspect of safety. There will never be another tyre war because it's too dangerous. The current tyres not only create more entertaining races but force drivers to take corners much slower than they otherwise would.

[BDunnell]

Hollywood is about entertainment, sport is about competition. :)

Would any of us watch the Olympics if we knew that half the marathon field were on a rolling escalator and as soon as they get close to the leader they will sail on past?

Of course not, but sport has to be at least enjoyable in order for the public to watch, and thus give it its 'raison d'etre'. The fact of competition isn't enough to guarantee interest.



The glitz and glamour used to be earned but now everyone is crying poor whilst spending half the budget of a small country on luxury and mobile homes. It seems to be more focused on keeping the exclusivity rather than continuing to earn it.

With this I completely agree. It is also a very naff form of glitz that F1 portrays, one out of keeping with the times.

[steveaki13]

Hollywood is about entertainment, sport is about competition. :)


This. Sport shouldnt have to be entertaining.

The competition should provide that whether there is passing or not.

[dj_bytedisaster]

The limits on engines, tyres, etc are to bring down costs in order to have a full grid. You're not just transporting everything from one tiny European country to another these days.

The cost problem wouldn't exist if the F1 money was distributed in a halfway fair manner. We have an old saying in Germany: "The devil always $hits on the biggest pile." and nowhere is it more true than in F1. If Ferrari ends up tenth in the constructors championship and Lotus wins, Ferrari will still get more money than Lotus. As long as there's such disparity, as long as the big teams get most of the money and the smaller ones are fed mere crumbs, there'll always be money problems.
The sponsor problems didn't exist when Marlboro & Co were still allowed to advertise. But hypocritical politicians ended that. Cigarettes and booze are legal sell-able products and our state gladly takes the exorbitant tobacco tax they're raising, yet a legally sell-able product cannot be advertized anymore.


Also, there's the aspect of safety. There will never be another tyre war because it's too dangerous. The current tyres not only create more entertaining races but force drivers to take corners much slower than they otherwise would.

That's the biggest load of baloney I've heard in a while. To quote the great philosopher Jeremias Clarcksonius from Britannia Magna: Speed doesn't kill. Suddenly becoming stationary, that's what gets you. Tire wars were never dangerous. We had one race (US 2005) in which Michelin had to withdraw their teams, because the French brought a tyre that was developed without having any data about the track surface. Tire competition makes the tyres generally better and safer, not the other way round. And this years Pirelli's do as much for safety as a gun to your head does for emotional contentment. Nothing. On the contrary, this years tyres would lose a rigidity contest to a paper bag.

[faster69]

The cost problem wouldn't exist if the F1 money was distributed in a halfway fair manner. We have an old saying in Germany: "The devil always $hits on the biggest pile." and nowhere is it more true than in F1. If Ferrari ends up tenth in the constructors championship and Lotus wins, Ferrari will still get more money than Lotus. As long as there's such disparity, as long as the big teams get most of the money and the smaller ones are fed mere crumbs, there'll always be money problems.
The sponsor problems didn't exist when Marlboro & Co were still allowed to advertise. But hypocritical politicians ended that. Cigarettes and booze are legal sell-able products and our state gladly takes the exorbitant tobacco tax they're raising, yet a legally sell-able product cannot be advertized anymore.

I'm not sure how the money is divided but that doesn't sound right. The bulk of that "prize money" comes from finishing top 3 in the constructors.

Ferrari are given extra money for simply being part of the championship, but they're the only team. Red Bull has beaten Lotus fair and square. Only one championship for Ferrari since 2004. Alonso must be on thin ice if he can't win the championship this with what is clearly the best car up until this point.

F1 has always been the strongest survive and shouldn't change. Look at what Red Bull has achieved. Look at Brawn in 2009. Lotus have to earn their way to the top.

Taxing cigarettes is fine. The tax builds revenue and creates a disincentive for someone to smoke.




That's the biggest load of baloney I've heard in a while. To quote the great philosopher Jeremias Clarcksonius from Britannia Magna: Speed doesn't kill. Suddenly becoming stationary, that's what gets you. Tire wars were never dangerous. We had one race (US 2005) in which Michelin had to withdraw their teams, because the French brought a tyre that was developed without having any data about the track surface. Tire competition makes the tyres generally better and safer, not the other way round. And this years Pirelli's do as much for safety as a gun to your head does for emotional contentment. Nothing. On the contrary, this years tyres would lose a rigidity contest to a paper bag.

No, it's about safety as much as spicing up the action. Like forcing teams to use one set of tyres the entire race in 2005. It was to try and end Ferrari's dominance by throwing up a new variable and to slow the cars down therefore making it safer.

A tyre war makes F1 more dangerous since they're create tyres that allow cars to carry much greater speed into and through the corners.

This year's tyres are safe (barring a couple delaminations which would be unacceptable if caused by the tyre design). Driving on heavily grained tyres while relatively slippery and difficult to drive on the limit, isn't dangerous. It just means you're forced to drive slower. Your logic is flawed.

[SGWilko]

But DRS doesn't fix this issue, does it? In a race without DRS, a faster car should not have issues overtaking when it's close enough on main straights due to drafting.

Well yes, but the faster car has to be at least 2 secs per lap faster to be able to make up for the inability (and the raison detre for DRS) to stay close enough in the corners.

[rjbetty]

Ok I've just skimmed through this lot quickly. I haven't been watching the races but I gather there was quite a stir caused by the recent Barcelona race.

I have to admit I was secretly very excited about the new tyres for this year. I thought this was going to be great and very interesting to see what would happen. But having seen some of what's gone on, and having considered other points of view on here, even I am thinking it's getting a bit silly, and I am someone who can tolerate quite a lot of "entertainment".

Malaysia was a bit of a watershed. I did follow that on Radio 5 Live, and relished the prospect of an unprecedented(?) race where 3 and 4 stops were the norm in a dry race. But as they made their 3rd and 4th stops and the order didn't change, I was really struck by how little difference the extra stops were making, and how much more boring and mundane it was than I ever expected. There wasn't much exciting about this at all. It wasn't really adding anything, and it just seemed a bit silly.

Then though I haven't followed any races since, I heard about Spain, and when I heard that drivers were being told basically whatever you do, don't race, even I thought "This is wrong".

As for DRS I can tolerate it grudgingly I suppose, but I think I'm growing a bit fed up of that too. Even in the bad old days of 2002 I remember everyone talking about how there needs to be more overtaking. Even then I have to say I felt it shouldn't just be overtaking for the sake of it. It felt like people just wanted to see cars driving past each other like on the M25. I have to say the thought of that seemed very unsatisfying to me. I actually think there is some value in a driver skillfully holding faster cars behind them: It is not for no reason that Jarama '81 is considered a classic. What I don't like though is a real life version of the AI cars from the Codemasters F1 games, just driving round following each other (with perfect reliability too).

I would like to see DRS banned (it was worth a try), but keep KERS and the other energy systems that are coming along. I admit I'm interested in this area; it's relevant and useful, and I'm impressed that F1 has now managed to hone bulky KERS batteries down into neat efficient little units (except, conveniently, for Mark Webber's).

[Koz]

The limits on engines, tyres, etc are to bring down costs in order to have a full grid. You're not just transporting everything from one tiny European country to another these days.

Also, there's the aspect of safety. There will never be another tyre war because it's too dangerous. The current tyres not only create more entertaining races but force drivers to take corners much slower than they otherwise would.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-pIDHmTJto

Yay for tyre safety!

[Whyzars]

A tyre war makes F1 more dangerous since they're create tyres that allow cars to carry much greater speed into and through the corners.



A tyre war is exactly what F1 needs as it will force the tyre manufacturers to produce tyres that optimise the vehicles they are attached to.


Tyres are a necessary evil and ideally, teams would manufacture their own tyres.

The governing body may be hijacking the design process by expecting that the car will eventually suit the tyres. This is a ridiculous position to take.

End this now.

[schmenke]

Limit the amount of fuel for a race, but make it severe; say half of current average volumes. Everything else, unrestricted, including tyres.