The new F1 format - good or bad?
Discussion
So within the last few years, Formula 1 has seen several major changes. We've had the re-fuel ban, a new point system, KERS, new tyres and as of this year, also DRS.
The biggest change IMO has been the re-fueling ban which has changed the racing completely and as a result of that, the tyres, KERS and DRS play a major role in delivering the 'spectacle'.
With this years season already rapped up, I thought it might be a good time to discuss the pros and cons of these changes. Good, bad?
Personally - while this year has produced some of the most exciting races, I'm still not sure if I like the new format. DRS and especially the tyres do a good job at making it rather interesting, but I still think banning refueling has made the sport as a whole a bit artificial. With refueling, you had the natural strategies - go long with more fuel but slower, or have short stints but with the risk of having to overtake more. I also liked that the job of the drivers was less a matter of conserving fuel or tyres but more to actually race and try to be as quick as possible.
Cheers
Phil
The biggest change IMO has been the re-fueling ban which has changed the racing completely and as a result of that, the tyres, KERS and DRS play a major role in delivering the 'spectacle'.
With this years season already rapped up, I thought it might be a good time to discuss the pros and cons of these changes. Good, bad?
Personally - while this year has produced some of the most exciting races, I'm still not sure if I like the new format. DRS and especially the tyres do a good job at making it rather interesting, but I still think banning refueling has made the sport as a whole a bit artificial. With refueling, you had the natural strategies - go long with more fuel but slower, or have short stints but with the risk of having to overtake more. I also liked that the job of the drivers was less a matter of conserving fuel or tyres but more to actually race and try to be as quick as possible.
Cheers
Phil
Well, you would always have that 'guarding fuel' angle regardless of refueling. You will only want on board what you need, and will still want to stretch it out as long as possible, whilst going as fast as possible.
I like DRS, it stops quicker drivers from being held up too much, and when cars are equal, it cancels itself out, I reckon.
KERS I'm a bit ambivolent about. It's the same for all, I suppose, so no advantage, really. Still, they will need it to market the same things in cars at some point I would imagine.
Tyres. I like the format, despite it not really doing anything in Korea. Tyres have always needed to be managed, so whether it is a tyre that lasts a whole race, or a bunch of them, with more stops, then I don't think it overly matters too much. A driver easy on tyres will be easy for the full race, or for stints, and vice versa. I do think that they need a higher allocation of tyres, to let them run a strategy based on the car, driver, and conditions, not how many of each tyre they have left.
Either way, this season has been, in my opinion, one of the best seasons for some time. Despite the dominance of Redbull, specifically Vettel the Kettle, the race for the rest of the pack has been fascinating, and is still wide open, in my opinion.
I'm not particularly happy with how designing around the regulations is getting clamped down on, again. The ingenuity of the engineers is something that is one of the more interesting facets off track, and seeing what the devious hits come up with next is always a pleasure to see. Give them more scope, not less.
I like DRS, it stops quicker drivers from being held up too much, and when cars are equal, it cancels itself out, I reckon.
KERS I'm a bit ambivolent about. It's the same for all, I suppose, so no advantage, really. Still, they will need it to market the same things in cars at some point I would imagine.
Tyres. I like the format, despite it not really doing anything in Korea. Tyres have always needed to be managed, so whether it is a tyre that lasts a whole race, or a bunch of them, with more stops, then I don't think it overly matters too much. A driver easy on tyres will be easy for the full race, or for stints, and vice versa. I do think that they need a higher allocation of tyres, to let them run a strategy based on the car, driver, and conditions, not how many of each tyre they have left.
Either way, this season has been, in my opinion, one of the best seasons for some time. Despite the dominance of Redbull, specifically Vettel the Kettle, the race for the rest of the pack has been fascinating, and is still wide open, in my opinion.
I'm not particularly happy with how designing around the regulations is getting clamped down on, again. The ingenuity of the engineers is something that is one of the more interesting facets off track, and seeing what the devious hits come up with next is always a pleasure to see. Give them more scope, not less.
Bring back re-fueling .
I hate watching heavy formula one cars wallowing around in the first half of the race.
Dislike the Tyre management in qualifying and teams not bothering coming out.
Dislike the long and narrow cars.. Does not look right.
Dislike the Stupid front wings.... absolutely ugly.. does not help overtaking so why have them?
Do not see the point of DRS.. seems to punish those who are having a good race.
Schumacher in canada for example.
Although they have been perfecting it in the last few races.. it has been ok.
I hate watching heavy formula one cars wallowing around in the first half of the race.
Dislike the Tyre management in qualifying and teams not bothering coming out.
Dislike the long and narrow cars.. Does not look right.
Dislike the Stupid front wings.... absolutely ugly.. does not help overtaking so why have them?
Do not see the point of DRS.. seems to punish those who are having a good race.
Schumacher in canada for example.
Although they have been perfecting it in the last few races.. it has been ok.
IMO - DRS (and the tyres) has become a necessity with the new format because if you didn't have it - you'd probably have rather boring races where the car starting in front, usually stays in front due to track position, running in clean air, and aero making it difficult to overtake otherwise.
I do wonder however, why go with a super complicated racing with DRS, option/prime tyre rules, kers etc - if the simple straightforward way of refueling deliever it without the gimmicks? Ok, safety, money and the whole 'green' argument I suppose... but trying to make racing green just for the argument and image sake (without being actually green) is daft.
I would prefer they bring back refueling, enhance safety and economy through other means (limiting engine size etc).
I do agree with the point that the heavy fuel loads has limited the spectacle for the first half of the race quite a bit and watching them nurse the cars around on the delicate tyres tiresome... even if the second half would in theory make up for it, usually by the end of the race, the cars with pace are either too far behind or the lead car simply to far ahead to spice things up.
It's a shame that in the current format - there's too small a difference in strategy and advantage between a car doing a 2 stopper and a 3 stopper.
I do wonder however, why go with a super complicated racing with DRS, option/prime tyre rules, kers etc - if the simple straightforward way of refueling deliever it without the gimmicks? Ok, safety, money and the whole 'green' argument I suppose... but trying to make racing green just for the argument and image sake (without being actually green) is daft.
I would prefer they bring back refueling, enhance safety and economy through other means (limiting engine size etc).
I do agree with the point that the heavy fuel loads has limited the spectacle for the first half of the race quite a bit and watching them nurse the cars around on the delicate tyres tiresome... even if the second half would in theory make up for it, usually by the end of the race, the cars with pace are either too far behind or the lead car simply to far ahead to spice things up.
It's a shame that in the current format - there's too small a difference in strategy and advantage between a car doing a 2 stopper and a 3 stopper.
I like DRS,releases faster cars therefore neutralises the aero block.KERS I can take or leave,if it ends up in road cars then OK,if not then get rid.These crap Pirelli tyres are a bloody joke though.Looking after tyres is one thing,but tyres that are knackered after ten or so laps is just rubbish.I would prefer two compounds available,both quite durable and they can use whichever they like or both.I don't miss refuelling,overtaking should not happen in the pits,but on the track.
Streps said:
If they do not get the zones right.
Some races it has been a bit too easy to get past using it.
Well that comes down to trial and error with the technology. So for example Turkey and Canada seem'd too easy, but Korea yesterday seem'd to work ok. Some races it has been a bit too easy to get past using it.
I think it's been a great addition to the season and hope it continues to offer great racing. Abu Dhabi last year could have been a different ball game if Alonso was able to chase down Vettel instead of looking at Petrov's gearbox.
I'm liking the new format on balance, yes DRS seems a little artificial, but it's only there to overcome the problem of cars running into the 'bad air' of the Car in front and no being able to do anything about it.
I think the FIA have been very clever about when and where to use it, I feared it would be a case where it was too easy to pass, you'd have a situation with drivers simply taking it in turns to pass every lap or where the drivers would avoid the risky mid corner or braking zone pass to wait for a DRS opportunity - but that hasn't happened.
Tyres are good, they make for some really exciting racing sometimes, personally I don't see the need to make the teams use both types of tyre in a race, it shouldn't be too hard for them to design a tyre range that gives advantages to both running long on a harder tyre or run a softer tyre and stop more.
Yes I agree it's not fantastic having over heavy cars at the start, but IMHO it's a lower price to pay to avoid the races that used to be ruined because of problems with fuel hoses not working and drivers driving off with them still attached.
I think the next stage for the FIA should be to be brave and follow Max's idea of capped team budgets, limiting testing and such has had the opposite of the desired effect of levelling the playing field, now the rich teams can spend £xx on fluid dynamics and simulators which the HRT's of the world can't plus, it's really hurting new drivers.
I think the FIA have been very clever about when and where to use it, I feared it would be a case where it was too easy to pass, you'd have a situation with drivers simply taking it in turns to pass every lap or where the drivers would avoid the risky mid corner or braking zone pass to wait for a DRS opportunity - but that hasn't happened.
Tyres are good, they make for some really exciting racing sometimes, personally I don't see the need to make the teams use both types of tyre in a race, it shouldn't be too hard for them to design a tyre range that gives advantages to both running long on a harder tyre or run a softer tyre and stop more.
Yes I agree it's not fantastic having over heavy cars at the start, but IMHO it's a lower price to pay to avoid the races that used to be ruined because of problems with fuel hoses not working and drivers driving off with them still attached.
I think the next stage for the FIA should be to be brave and follow Max's idea of capped team budgets, limiting testing and such has had the opposite of the desired effect of levelling the playing field, now the rich teams can spend £xx on fluid dynamics and simulators which the HRT's of the world can't plus, it's really hurting new drivers.
I must be in a very small minority in thinking that the Pirelli tyres are a complete joke.
Asking a major tyre manufacturer to design tyres that last about 15 laps with no greater durability for the harder compound is as daft as asking an engine designer to build-in a 30% failure rate because “it improved the show”. The current tyres disadvantage the second driver as he has to complete one more lap on a tyre that has “hit the wall”
Teams still insist on referring to them as Prime (race) and Option (qualifier) when they should in fact call them Marginal and Joker.
A simple rule change requiring all teams to make a minimum of two tyre changes while still having to use both compounds would be a far less contrived way of achieving much the same result. If the harder compound was designed to be a good percentage more durable, then some interesting and varied race strategies might evolve.
Asking a major tyre manufacturer to design tyres that last about 15 laps with no greater durability for the harder compound is as daft as asking an engine designer to build-in a 30% failure rate because “it improved the show”. The current tyres disadvantage the second driver as he has to complete one more lap on a tyre that has “hit the wall”
Teams still insist on referring to them as Prime (race) and Option (qualifier) when they should in fact call them Marginal and Joker.
A simple rule change requiring all teams to make a minimum of two tyre changes while still having to use both compounds would be a far less contrived way of achieving much the same result. If the harder compound was designed to be a good percentage more durable, then some interesting and varied race strategies might evolve.
I'm surprised so many people are keen to bring back refuelling. My recollection of that era was drivers following each other around and trying to get past in the pitstops. Nobody ever seemed to overtake on track IIRC.
This season has been interesting mainly due to the tyres - they have enabled different people to be quick at different points in the race. It has also meant that a ten second gap doesn't necessarily mean much these days whereas it used to be a very safe margin.
I would still like to see different engine configurations in use to mix it up more - to make some cars quicker on the straights, others quicker in the twisties, but I'll just have to accept this is never going to happen again.
This season has been interesting mainly due to the tyres - they have enabled different people to be quick at different points in the race. It has also meant that a ten second gap doesn't necessarily mean much these days whereas it used to be a very safe margin.
I would still like to see different engine configurations in use to mix it up more - to make some cars quicker on the straights, others quicker in the twisties, but I'll just have to accept this is never going to happen again.
Melvin Udall said:
It's only really been the last race that seemed to have no discernible difference. Remember Vettel driving for eleventy4 laps at Monaco?
I also remember hearing Shuey’s car in Japan being so far off a normal race pace that it sounded like he was taking the wife and kids out for a Sunday afternoon drive.Racing cars should be raced in pretty much their optimal state – Le Mans does endurance racing so much better.
rdjohn said:
I also remember hearing Shuey’s car in Japan being so far off a normal race pace that it sounded like he was taking the wife and kids out for a Sunday afternoon drive.
Racing cars should be raced in pretty much their optimal state – Le Mans does endurance racing so much better.
Hence why they should be given more tyres and run the strategy they want, not the stratagy based on the tyres they have left.Racing cars should be raced in pretty much their optimal state – Le Mans does endurance racing so much better.
Melvin Udall said:
Hence why they should be given more tyres and run the strategy they want, not the stratagy based on the tyres they have left.
You may have heard Pirellis’ recent complaints that they are required to bring umpteen sets of tyres to each race (much heavier and bulkier than refuelling rigs) but they get unused tyres back from each team. They are also not happy that in Q3 teams are sitting in the pits rather than going for a time.The problem is that they have the wrong tyres and that they are stifling good competition – It is a very poor marketing return for them in not being allowed to produce durable tyres, unless there really is no such thing as bad publicity.
I think all cars should be made to take part in each part of qually that they have, er, qualified for. And they all have one set of the softest tyres that they use for all 3 parts. They can start the race on whatever tyres they want.
I don't imagine it will change the result particularly, but at least it makes it a bit more level mid pack. And what about reverse grids twice a year based on their championship positions to save sandbagging at the end of a poor race coming into pay.
Do it at the boring tracks like Valencia for instance.
I don't imagine it will change the result particularly, but at least it makes it a bit more level mid pack. And what about reverse grids twice a year based on their championship positions to save sandbagging at the end of a poor race coming into pay.
Do it at the boring tracks like Valencia for instance.
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff