Getting rid of VSC - any negatives?
Discussion
I continue to be disillusioned by the VSC system. As a spectator, it is very difficult to follow what is happening at times, especially with a random ending time. Drivers seems to get caught out by it also. We have had a good few races where it has affected the outcome. Were we robbed of a fantastic finish at Baku due to Lewis losing out on time? For something that intends to 'neutralise the race' it seems to do anything but. As a spectator, a full safety car is far more exciting and easy to follow. I can see how a full safety car can take up a longer period of time, what with lapped traffic, grouping up the cars etc but are there any other downsides you can see to going with full SC's only? I personally have never liked the VSC.
I think the system needs looking at as drivers seem to gain and lose which seems strange. I am sure Lewis said he lost 2 seconds during that period. Not sure if that was his fault or not.
But F1 need VSC and as mentioned it's much better than a full safety car. Driver and marshalls lives are too important.
Talking about marshalls
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaE7W3UK1nw
But F1 need VSC and as mentioned it's much better than a full safety car. Driver and marshalls lives are too important.
Talking about marshalls
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaE7W3UK1nw
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 29th April 13:27
Andy S15 said:
...but are there any other downsides you can see to going with full SC's only?
Yes, it creates fake races with fake excitement.Bottas was quicker than Hamilton so Bottas built up a gap to Hamilton. Why should he then be punished and have that gap taken away - unless it's necessary to ensure marshals can work on the track?
I mean if closing everyone up, removing any advantage one driver has by being faster than another why not just do it every 5 laps, or whenever a gap is more than 2s, or every time you want a TV ad break?
IS it actually exciting to have someone with almost a lap lead lose it all through no fault of their own and in a condition where a VSC would have been perfectly fine and then potentially lose the race by 1s? If it is, why not have a series of 3 lap races.
I think it’s fine in principle, though maybe applied to readily on occasion.
It protects the less careful, any losses over the period are down to the individual drivers and they can’t make gains against others without being seen.
As said, much less of an influence on the races than a full SC.
It protects the less careful, any losses over the period are down to the individual drivers and they can’t make gains against others without being seen.
As said, much less of an influence on the races than a full SC.
I think they should keep it but the end of the VSC should be timed to coincide at the part of the lap where it started rather than at a random time when the incident is clear.
This way everyone gets the same amount of impact rather than some losing out more than others depending on which sectors of track they had it on.
This way everyone gets the same amount of impact rather than some losing out more than others depending on which sectors of track they had it on.
London424 said:
I think they should keep it but the end of the VSC should be timed to coincide at the part of the lap where it started rather than at a random time when the incident is clear.
This way everyone gets the same amount of impact rather than some losing out more than others depending on which sectors of track they had it on.
But if you're in the middle of a long straight when it's called then you first have to slow significantly, then accelerate back up to speed again on the highest speed part of the track, which will be a double hit compared to someone who is in a slow corner when it's called, and for whom it will take only a second to slow down and speed back up to racing speed. Not that they could possibly hope to coordinate it so that everyone was in exactly the same place on track anyway.This way everyone gets the same amount of impact rather than some losing out more than others depending on which sectors of track they had it on.
There is no completely fair way to start/end VSC, so they should just keep it random if they're going to keep this system. At least it should even out over a few uses - you gain on some, you lose on some.
//j17 said:
Bottas was quicker than Hamilton so Bottas built up a gap to Hamilton. Why should he then be punished and have that gap taken away - unless it's necessary to ensure marshals can work on the track?
I mean if closing everyone up, removing any advantage one driver has by being faster than another why not just do it every 5 laps, or whenever a gap is more than 2s, or every time you want a TV ad break?
IS it actually exciting to have someone with almost a lap lead lose it all through no fault of their own and in a condition where a VSC would have been perfectly fine and then potentially lose the race by 1s? If it is, why not have a series of 3 lap races.
Yeah that probably is all true but I don't really care. Safety cars or full restarts do create more exciting races by closing all the gaps up. I don't see how it's fake excitement either, you get the anticipation of the cars all backed up, swerving around to keep the tyres warm, then the leader punting it off away from the pack. It's great TBH.I mean if closing everyone up, removing any advantage one driver has by being faster than another why not just do it every 5 laps, or whenever a gap is more than 2s, or every time you want a TV ad break?
IS it actually exciting to have someone with almost a lap lead lose it all through no fault of their own and in a condition where a VSC would have been perfectly fine and then potentially lose the race by 1s? If it is, why not have a series of 3 lap races.
The only benefit of the VSC from a spectators point of view is that it's quicker than having to wait for the back markers to unlap etc.
Personally I still see VSC as a bit of a compromised solution to cover the Jules scenario (even though there is proof he was still flat out under double yellows) and we never used to complain about a SC. I'd much rather the excitement and bunching up of the field that the SC produces at the expense of a little more time, personally. SC restarts feel quite rare these days.
Andy S15 said:
Personally I still see VSC as a bit of a compromised solution to cover the Jules scenario (even though there is proof he was still flat out under double yellows) and we never used to complain about a SC. I'd much rather the excitement and bunching up of the field that the SC produces at the expense of a little more time, personally. SC restarts feel quite rare these days.
People complain all the time about the SC...thegreenhell said:
SmoothCriminal said:
May be if he followed the rules already in place and actually slowed down he wouldn't have crashed into the tractor.
Harsh, but fair. There isn't really any excuse for crashing in double waved yellows. He could easily have taken a couple of marshals with him.Better to bring in a max speed for the sections with DWYs and control it in the same way as pit limiters. Marshalls can be safer, drivers don't lose anything and no-one can easily gain under the condition.
Vaud said:
Double waved yellows create the wrong tension - they are racers being asked to lose advantage.
Better to bring in a max speed for the sections with DWYs and control it in the same way as pit limiters. Marshalls can be safer, drivers don't lose anything and no-one can easily gain under the condition.
If everyone obeys the rules then there is no advantage lost. Unfortunately racing drivers have to be forced to obey rules as they can't be trusted to do it on their own. Heck, a lot of them don't even see the flags in the first place.Better to bring in a max speed for the sections with DWYs and control it in the same way as pit limiters. Marshalls can be safer, drivers don't lose anything and no-one can easily gain under the condition.
Kraken said:
If everyone obeys the rules then there is no advantage lost. Unfortunately racing drivers have to be forced to obey rules as they can't be trusted to do it on their own. Heck, a lot of them don't even see the flags in the first place.
Every driver will slow to a different amount in DWY - you are asking them to stop racing, but not specifying by how much.Vaud said:
Every driver will slow to a different amount in DWY - you are asking them to stop racing, but not specifying by how much.
Exactly, the tradition was to lift just before the flags and acknowledge the marshal post and then argue your case with the Stewards, if necessary.We should not be too concerned with driver injuries doing what they love for serious bucks. The worry should be for the unpaid marshals working trackside. Their safety is paramount IMHO.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff