Discussion
With all the talk this season about strategy and how important it is to get right, it got me thinking. How do people qualify to become a strategist in F1? What are the key aspects of the job; mathematical, computational, common sense? As for changing the strategy mid-race is it all done by computer simulation or are the strategists simply following everything that's going on in the race and going through a list of permutations themselves? Thought I'd open the question up to PH to see if anyone could answer. Over to you folks.
caz4213 said:
With all the talk this season about strategy and how important it is to get right, it got me thinking. How do people qualify to become a strategist in F1? What are the key aspects of the job; mathematical, computational, common sense? As for changing the strategy mid-race is it all done by computer simulation or are the strategists simply following everything that's going on in the race and going through a list of permutations themselves? Thought I'd open the question up to PH to see if anyone could answer. Over to you folks.
Engineering degree.A mate is a race simulation engineer and he aint thick... he used to work for motogp ducati before moving ro redbull.
Dinner convo in the RB canteen is like a professor convention at mass. Good job i have letters after my name too or you'd get the impression you'd be looked at like dirt!
Flying Toilet said:
Don't believe everything you here...the conversations are like most canteens.
Not everyone in the RB organisation has letters after there name...you would be suprised!
Absolutely!! A professor convention at mass? That's a good one.Not everyone in the RB organisation has letters after there name...you would be suprised!
Now, if it really feels that way, then maybe one should be going back to school?
Vast majority aren't engineers, remember reading about a Mclaren guy who completely changed the way teams looked at strategy and he wasn't an engineer, he was a statistician.
Its not got a lot to do with engineer nouse, its all about looking at different variables and planning the best strategy, which is mostly based on probably and statistics.
Its not got a lot to do with engineer nouse, its all about looking at different variables and planning the best strategy, which is mostly based on probably and statistics.
DSM2 said:
Absolutely!! A professor convention at mass? That's a good one.
Now, if it really feels that way, then maybe one should be going back to school?
At our table of 6 or more, all had either engineering degrees, enginering degree + maths or a masters in engineering or something related.Now, if it really feels that way, then maybe one should be going back to school?
From what I heard and saw, unless you have an engineering degree you won't get much of a look in, but obviously there are exceptions to the rule. I imagine to get a fod in you'd have to be very convincing without such stuff.
neil martin who was with McLaren and moved to ferrari for well over £500K per annum has a background in futures and options trading from a chaos mathematical background and then moved onto gambling software development linked to probability equations.
On the pit wall or at the factory engineers are running massive simulation strategies linking cars on track and their sector times to complex mathematical programmes....thus working out when to pit....these equations include, traffic, fuel, tyres, weather and pit lane length etc.
A background in complex mathematics and engineering probably onto and above Phd level would help. Also a good knowledge of computing and web development tools too.
Neil is a top guy, intelligent but no nerd. Paddy Lowe at McLaren is more of a 'geek' but I doubt there are many people quicker in a cart than him nor half as intelligent in the real world, ie outside of F1.
On the pit wall or at the factory engineers are running massive simulation strategies linking cars on track and their sector times to complex mathematical programmes....thus working out when to pit....these equations include, traffic, fuel, tyres, weather and pit lane length etc.
A background in complex mathematics and engineering probably onto and above Phd level would help. Also a good knowledge of computing and web development tools too.
Neil is a top guy, intelligent but no nerd. Paddy Lowe at McLaren is more of a 'geek' but I doubt there are many people quicker in a cart than him nor half as intelligent in the real world, ie outside of F1.
Jonathan Legard said:
MMy wife and all her colleagues have doctorates. Their topic of choice over dinner? Shoes, soaps and office gossip.
That'll go some way to explain your enthusiasm for F1 then 
Seriously, though, I must admit that I have pondered long on the subject of F1 strategists and how they can align so many variables into one single decision. I mean, for deciding when to pit for tyres are they fed engine power settings / suspension settings / brake bias / diff settings / downforce / fuel levels etc etc? If so, how the feck to they assimilate all this information and condense it into "pit for tyres on lap 24"?????
Interesting stuff!
kiteless said:
Jonathan Legard said:
MMy wife and all her colleagues have doctorates. Their topic of choice over dinner? Shoes, soaps and office gossip.
That'll go some way to explain your enthusiasm for F1 then Seriously, though, I must admit that I have pondered long on the subject of F1 strategists and how they can align so many variables into one single decision. I mean, for deciding when to pit for tyres are they fed engine power settings / suspension settings / brake bias / diff settings / downforce / fuel levels etc etc? If so, how the feck to they assimilate all this information and condense it into "pit for tyres on lap 24"?????
Interesting stuff!
Realistically, they build a model based on all the variables. in practice, the good guys can adapt/change to things like safety cars/other cars pitting and can decide on the spot if they should change. the bad guys try to recalculate the model, miss the opportunity and hope that when the driver does come in, one mechanic screws up and he can blame him.
honestly, its a combination of models and instinct. Not engineering.
From what they showed of the Mclaren race control it's all done based on models simulating the outcome of all possible outcomes. So should there be a safety car you can instantly check your simulation to see whether you would be best to pit or stay out etc.
I'm sure some teams make human based decisions but the computer models seemed to be what Mclaren worked with.
I'm sure some teams make human based decisions but the computer models seemed to be what Mclaren worked with.
deveng said:
xr287 said:
you can instantly check your simulation
I sincerely doubt models and simulations that complex can be changed instantly!This is where the human part comes in. Computers can't make decisions as fast as people, unfortunately people aren't always as accurate as computers.
From what I remember of the programme it was constantly recalculating so it may have been calculating a safety car simulation constantly even though the problem wasn't there yet.
Edited by xr287 on Saturday 14th May 10:35
I should imagine most come from a maths background.
We have some clever people at work, one qualified as an accountant and worked in the deputy PMs office, got bored with that and went and got a maths degree and then a phd in some discipline or other of maths too.
They will run simulations/models to check various different strategies, but they also need to define the algorithms that the software will use to run the simulations.
We have some clever people at work, one qualified as an accountant and worked in the deputy PMs office, got bored with that and went and got a maths degree and then a phd in some discipline or other of maths too.
They will run simulations/models to check various different strategies, but they also need to define the algorithms that the software will use to run the simulations.
Edited by Crafty_ on Saturday 14th May 18:10
Crafty_ said:
I should imagine most come from a maths background.
We have some clever people at work, one qualified as an accountant and worked in the deputy PMs office, got bored with that and went and got a maths degree and then a phd in some discipline or other of maths too.
They will run simulations/models to check various different strategies, but they also need to define the algorithms that the software will use to run the simulations.
From what I have seen it's several screen's worth of matricies and a sh!tload of graphs. Not a circuit diagram in sight.We have some clever people at work, one qualified as an accountant and worked in the deputy PMs office, got bored with that and went and got a maths degree and then a phd in some discipline or other of maths too.
They will run simulations/models to check various different strategies, but they also need to define the algorithms that the software will use to run the simulations.
Edited by Crafty_ on Saturday 14th May 18:10
Pretty interesting really, I'm surprised the thought hasn't occurred to me before. I'm in the middle of a physics degree at the moment, thinking of what possible use the complex maths and computing modules I'm taking would be in the real world (assuming you count F1 as the real world). By the sounds of it F1 strategist certainly fits the bill!
sharpfocus said:
I do not miss matlab.
Not motorsport, but I work somewhere where at the next table in the canteen yesterday there was a game of chess being played!
I use matlab a very small amount at work and I need to get better, I work in development so it's invaluable for analysis and calibration!Not motorsport, but I work somewhere where at the next table in the canteen yesterday there was a game of chess being played!
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff