F1 regs, what's the point of some of them?
Discussion
Parc Ferme, no testing etc why are they trying to force cars to try and race when they are not properly set up, or in the case of new teams, developed?
What is the point of the prime and option tyres? Just trying to create artificial excitement? It doesn't work! It's stupid. I clearly know better then Bernie E.
What is the point of the prime and option tyres? Just trying to create artificial excitement? It doesn't work! It's stupid. I clearly know better then Bernie E.
Parc Fermé
Teams have Friday and Saturday morning to prep cars up to qualifying by which time, they need to be ready race. The principle behind the idea is to stop teams qualifying with a car effectively different from that which is raced – which used to happen quite a lot.
Option tyres
Yes – designed to add additional dimension to strategies but seldom yields the variables it is designed to – if all teams put the same equations into a computer – they tend to come up with the same answers.
Teams have Friday and Saturday morning to prep cars up to qualifying by which time, they need to be ready race. The principle behind the idea is to stop teams qualifying with a car effectively different from that which is raced – which used to happen quite a lot.
Option tyres
Yes – designed to add additional dimension to strategies but seldom yields the variables it is designed to – if all teams put the same equations into a computer – they tend to come up with the same answers.
Parc Ferme was mainly a cost cutting exercise, and I'd say it works. If you have to race what you qualified with it stops teams completely changing the car for the two different disciplines and developing special qualifying parts that are lighter etc, but wouldnt last a race. Taken to the extreme, with free reign you could imagine a qualifying spec car with things like the driver's water bottle removed and replaced with ballast in the optimum position, and smaller radiators etc for the lower cooling requirement, which means smaller sidepods could be fitted etc etc.
It also means the team mechanics aren't up to silly hours every Saturday night changing the car from quali to race spec, but I suspect that was a secondary consideration.
It also means the team mechanics aren't up to silly hours every Saturday night changing the car from quali to race spec, but I suspect that was a secondary consideration.
The tyre rules are also part of the cost cutting. Instead of developing tyres for each track (and up to 2005 refining them for each car) there are now just the four compounds for the entire season. The requirement to use both types also reduces the total number required as previously teams would just pick the best for them and ignore the other half of the supplies.
Mr_Thyroid said:
the point of the rules should be to increase the strategic options of the teams - this is why I cannot understand the 'must use both compounds of tyre' rule. Particularly in this no refuling era it radically reduces the teams options.
They could spread it over the whole season saying that you have to use 50% of each tyre throughout the season in race conditions +- 5%.Problem solved.
Mr_Thyroid said:
the point of the rules should be to increase the strategic options of the teams - this is why I cannot understand the 'must use both compounds of tyre' rule. Particularly in this no refuling era it radically reduces the teams options.
Not really, if they didnt have to use both compounds then for 9 races out of 10 they'd use the same compound for the whole race because the softs can be made to last, so on the whole there'd be even less variationclarksonisawilly said:
Ok, so parc ferme makes some sense now, but, suspension settings. Rear wing settings. WTF can't these be adjusted? Ride height, granted there is an issue with fuel loadings but teams are having to race a wet race with dry set ups, and vice versa?
The setting can be adjusted if the race is started as a wet race (Aus 2010 being an example). This negates the need for the two tyre type rule and as a wet set up is generally softer, the suspension, wings and brake cooling are permitted to be changed within the tolerance of the FIA regulations.LocoBlade said:
Mr_Thyroid said:
the point of the rules should be to increase the strategic options of the teams - this is why I cannot understand the 'must use both compounds of tyre' rule. Particularly in this no refuling era it radically reduces the teams options.
Not really, if they didnt have to use both compounds then for 9 races out of 10 they'd use the same compound for the whole race because the softs can be made to last, so on the whole there'd be even less variationMr_Thyroid said:
LocoBlade said:
Mr_Thyroid said:
the point of the rules should be to increase the strategic options of the teams - this is why I cannot understand the 'must use both compounds of tyre' rule. Particularly in this no refuling era it radically reduces the teams options.
Not really, if they didnt have to use both compounds then for 9 races out of 10 they'd use the same compound for the whole race because the softs can be made to last, so on the whole there'd be even less variationLocoBlade said:
Mr_Thyroid said:
LocoBlade said:
Mr_Thyroid said:
the point of the rules should be to increase the strategic options of the teams - this is why I cannot understand the 'must use both compounds of tyre' rule. Particularly in this no refuling era it radically reduces the teams options.
Not really, if they didnt have to use both compounds then for 9 races out of 10 they'd use the same compound for the whole race because the softs can be made to last, so on the whole there'd be even less variation- see Hamilton in Australia.
Do they take the same compounds to each race? I was under the impression Bridgestone tweaked the composition on a racexrace basis. I'd rather see a menu of compounds offered at the start of the season and teams allowed to select whatever they want to use from it using their allocation. 1 stop / 10 stops just let the teams decide what they can make work & design their chassis for it, there might be some wildly different strategies thrown into the pot then 
Mr_Thyroid said:
But, as we've already seen, it's virtually impossible to overtake. Track position is king.
- see Hamilton in Australia.
I dont see how allowing them to run either tyre is going to help very much though? I guess if they dont have to pit at all some could try running the hards from start to finish but that has the potential to make the racing even more dull if that tactic becomes the default option, as they'll be conserving tyres even more throughout the race and won't want to push or try to follow someone too closely for risk of damaging the tyres.- see Hamilton in Australia.
The thing is, in modern F1 we're unlikely to get many situations where one team pulls a rabbit out of the hat with strategy and does something completely curveball that turns out to be far better than what everyone else does, because there's such good computer modelling etc of the scenarios that if one strategy is significantly better than others, most teams will know that and do the same. If running one set of tyres for the whole race is best because it gives track position on a circuit that's hard to overtake, all the teams will do it.
clarksonisawilly said:
Parc Ferme, no testing etc why are they trying to force cars to try and race when they are not properly set up, or in the case of new teams, developed?
What is the point of the prime and option tyres? Just trying to create artificial excitement? It doesn't work! It's stupid. I clearly know better then Bernie E.
As others have said the main point of the parc ferme regs was to prevent the teams spending silly money producing qualifying spec parts. Another consideration is that by forcing the teams to compromise setup so that they can't have an ideal one for each session you are giving an element of strategy (which day do we optimise for?) and of driver skill (driving around a compromised setup). What is the point of the prime and option tyres? Just trying to create artificial excitement? It doesn't work! It's stupid. I clearly know better then Bernie E.
No testing is almost purely down to cost, testing is very expensive and in the days of unresticted testing it did tend to serve to widen the rich/poor divide and this lead to the back teams falling even further behind. It certainly seems to have shown some signs of success - look at the relative improvements made by teams like Force India in recent years.
The introduction of the brand new teams changes the ball game significantly IMO and personally I would like to see some limited testing allowed based on constructor's position, you could use the Thursday of a race weekend (keeps costs down) and let say the current bottom three teams run their test drivers only.
The prime vs option tires are intended to create strategy options and excitement - its arguable whether it works but that was the intent.
LocoBlade said:
Mr_Thyroid said:
But, as we've already seen, it's virtually impossible to overtake. Track position is king.
- see Hamilton in Australia.
I dont see how allowing them to run either tyre is going to help very much though? I guess if they dont have to pit at all some could try running the hards from start to finish but that has the potential to make the racing even more dull if that tactic becomes the default option, as they'll be conserving tyres even more throughout the race and won't want to push or try to follow someone too closely for risk of damaging the tyres.- see Hamilton in Australia.
The thing is, in modern F1 we're unlikely to get many situations where one team pulls a rabbit out of the hat with strategy and does something completely curveball that turns out to be far better than what everyone else does, because there's such good computer modelling etc of the scenarios that if one strategy is significantly better than others, most teams will know that and do the same. If running one set of tyres for the whole race is best because it gives track position on a circuit that's hard to overtake, all the teams will do it.
I hate the "must use both compounds of tyre" rule and also the rule about having to use the qualifying tyre at the start of the race - IMHO the fastest driver in quali should be able to choose the optimum tyre on which to start the race. I suppose it is at least slightly better than the "race fuel in qualifying" nonsense we've had the last few years though...
Mr_Thyroid said:
LocoBlade said:
Mr_Thyroid said:
But, as we've already seen, it's virtually impossible to overtake. Track position is king.
- see Hamilton in Australia.
I dont see how allowing them to run either tyre is going to help very much though? I guess if they dont have to pit at all some could try running the hards from start to finish but that has the potential to make the racing even more dull if that tactic becomes the default option, as they'll be conserving tyres even more throughout the race and won't want to push or try to follow someone too closely for risk of damaging the tyres.- see Hamilton in Australia.
The thing is, in modern F1 we're unlikely to get many situations where one team pulls a rabbit out of the hat with strategy and does something completely curveball that turns out to be far better than what everyone else does, because there's such good computer modelling etc of the scenarios that if one strategy is significantly better than others, most teams will know that and do the same. If running one set of tyres for the whole race is best because it gives track position on a circuit that's hard to overtake, all the teams will do it.
Edited by LocoBlade on Tuesday 13th April 13:35
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff