How to fix F1?

[Sodemo]

For me, there is no need to have tarmac run off around slow or medium corners. It started as a means of slowing a high speed spinning car or one which had run out of brakes at the end of a long braking zone, but now it seems to have been adapted to virtually every corner type. I’ve never seen a more undeserving use of tarmac run off as that out of the “Bus Stop” at Spa. I honestly don’t know what the *safety argument* is for having that there.

Tarmac should be used at the end of a long straight, fine or perhaps in an area where gravel wouldn’t work on the outside of a fast corner but that’s the limit as far as I’m concerned. I’d also stipulate that a minimum of 3 metres of grass be used before any tarmac for fast corner use.

[Sodemo]

Carlos Sainz calling again for more gravel traps after the Brazil turn 4 incident. Couldn't agree more.

[S griffin]

I think the drivers have had enough of these tarmac runoffs. Too many liberties have been taken with them to be frank. Time to put better deterrents in place and we’d see drivers running wide less. It’s not rocket science

[chillibowl]

By all means, lets go back to more gravel traps and complaining about how long it takes to remove a beached car under a SC.

Cause thats how they used to bunch up the field before DRS.

I think last race it was said how few SC periods there have been this year...something like 13 and most were VSCs? Could have heard that wrong though.

But seriously, there is a trade off here...so i guess it depends on what mole hill one wishes to stand on.

Track limits or less retirements/less SC periods. Both for sure have their pros and cons.

[S griffin]

How many retirements were there in Monaco this year? That’s right only one and that was due to a stuck wheelnut. One DNS due to a legacy of a practice accident. So drivers can cope with keeping it away from the gravel

And with the VSC we see less need for a SC

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by S griffin

How many retirements were there in Monaco this year? That’s right only one and that was due to a stuck wheelnut. One DNS due to a legacy of a practice accident. So drivers can cope with keeping it away from the gravel

And with the VSC we see less need for a SC

Is the slowest race of the year really a good example for the fastest sport in the world?

But dont you worry griff...you will get your wish.

The fastest course surrounded by barriers in Saudi Arabia.

Look forward to hearing you complain about that.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

By all means, lets go back to more gravel traps and complaining about how long it takes to remove a beached car under a SC.

Leclerc, Germany 2019?

[chillibowl]

first off let me apologize for being a bit too antagonistic at the end of my last post. my bad so apologies to S griffin.

more politely i should have said that i personally dont like the number of races on the calendar, specifically the increasing number of street courses they are filling said calendar up with.

this factors in because i tend to not enjoy these street circuits as much, their lack of space, and these barriers/deterrents that are inherently characteristic of street circuits.

i think they create processional races. i think they add to the specter or image of danger but add little else. in reality they are actually just deterrents to close racing, deterrents to passing, and deterrents to driving on the limit.

mind you Baku has been a surprise and i have high hopes for S.A. so will try more to keep an open mind.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Leclerc, Germany 2019?

right!

or what would Sochi this year have been like had there been gravel instead of tarmac...drivers took chances with tires that didnt match the weather and it was thrilling. risks like that probably dont happen if there were less bail out room.

races in variable weather conditions at bespoke race tracks built/set up to handle modern F1 cars is something i personally love a lot. i love to see the drivers attack them with abandon.

anyways, i doubt i will convince anyone to change their minds on this so i suppose we should all just be happy to see racing on the variety of tracks currently on offer.

[S griffin]

The problem is drivers are taking more risks because they know they can get away with it and that in itself can be dangerous. Especially when it comes to wheel to wheel stuff. It could be argued that the asphalt runoff at Eau Rouge has made the corner more dangerous. I certainly think it contributed to the crash that killed Anthoine Hubert in a way. If gravel is there, cars would be less likely to come back on track and t boned at speed

Actually come to think of it, I like the idea of asphalt at some corners but not everywhere. You can get away with something here but not here. Mainly get rid of tarmac runoff where track limits are a problem

[wnut]

FIA 2022 Road relevant prototype.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

FIA 2022 Road relevant prototype.

That's awesome.

[BTCC frog]

So over the last two years, there have been far more red flags than there have been in the past, and while some of this is down to increased concerns about safety, I think it is perhaps more down to the fact that they tend to spice up races. Baku was an example of this, and while it seems that the teams have agreed for races to finish under green flags, I'm not sure this is necessarily a good thing.

The problem with all these red flags is that, in the past, teams had to look at an incident and guess if there was going to be a safety car or a red flag. They generally had to think about the severity of the incident and how long it would take to repair. But now, they also have to think about how much the race director wants there to be action at that particular moment, and I think that brings too much luck into the equation. In the last two years, there have been a huge amount of red flags compared to normal, and many of them haven’t been necessary from a safety perspective. Obviously to suggest that Grosjean’s crash in Bahrain didn’t warrant a red flag would be absolutely ludicrous, and the same with the Mugello restart crash. But from a safety perspective, the Baku one wasn’t necessary and so, from a sporting perspective, should have finished under safety car.

Thinking back to the last brilliant title battle we had, in 2012, that season finished under the safety car, after Paul di Resta crashed in Brazil and there were no complaints about that. If it had happened in 2022, maybe the red flag would have been called. A one-lap restart may have taken place, with Alonso starting second and needing to pass Button to win, and Vettel in sixth needing to stay out of trouble. Yes, that would have been thrilling, but at that point Vettel had won it fair and square and it would be unnecessary and unfair to throw his championship up in the air when he just had to get round the final couple of laps, because of an incident that would have just been a safety car if it had happened at any other time in the season. And I say this as someone who still to this day wishes Alonso had won that championship.

I suppose what I am trying to say is that safety cars and red flags are necessary to neutralise the race, for safety reasons, but they always bring a large amount of luck into play, particularly red flags now with the standing starts. So I believe they should only be used when necessary for safety reasons, and not additionally to spice up the show. But I have never minded safety cars in the past, because they were always used consistently and so it was easier for the teams to predict when they were coming. And maybe in five or ten years time, the same will happen, but with the new conditions. But at the moment, it feels too random whether or not a red flag will be called, and that is increasing the amount that luck plays a part.

Perhaps a good compromise would either be to have red flags as frequently as we have them now, but revert to rolling starts on restarts, or keep them as standing restarts but only use them when they are necessary for safety reasons. I prefer the latter, but think the former is more likely. And maybe it would also be better to ban tyre changes under red flag (wet conditions excepted), as the huge amount of good fortune that Verstappen, Ocon and Ricciardo had in Saudi and the bad luck for Mercedes, Perez and Norris would have been less extreme in the other direction if tyre changes weren't allowed, while Mercedes have also said that the red flag saved Hamilton from retirement in Silverstone.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

As we have move this discussion to here, I'll repost what I suggested for discussion earlier...

Red flags and restarts... I'm thinking red flag in first 10% of race laps then standing start. To clarify that, I'd say the incident has to happen in the first 10 %, just to cover a situation where they may call a safety car initially and then red flag it.
Any red flag afterwards should be a rolling single file restart. (subject to safety considerations).
If it's a restart in the final 10% of race laps then the race must run for a minimum of 3 green flag laps... if that means giving the teams a extra few kilos of fuel at the start so be it. If the teams then want to take the chance of running less ... that's their choice they know the risk.
The race notes for each weekend would clearly state which lap constitutes the 10% mark from the start and the finish.

Tyre changes at red flags are a necessary evil in that cars may have had to drive through debris coming back to pit lane.... solution change to another set of the same compound.

[chillibowl]

i would imagine this was not the intended effect, but i read your post as more of an acknowledgement that different parts of the race, when an incident occurs, need to be governed by different sets of rules.

for me this makes sense. and not just the time/lap something happens within a race but also i would extend it to different parts of the season.

this will no doubt trigger a rehash about consistency of penalties...to that i would say incidents are more nuanced then or just limited to just what happened in moment X. timing and history are also variables which must be factored into any rule framework and penalty application.

and indeed a certain level of flexibility should be written into the rules which allows for new interpretations/new situations imo.

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Watching a few youtube videos and reading some articles about the Champcar/IRL split. The thought came to mind that one of the weaknesses for F1 nowadays (ironically) is that Champcar/CART hasn't emerged as a proper alternative, or even a priority, top tier racing series. Effectively an American F1 world championship.

The world is too big for F1. It has to be all things to all people, be everywhere all the time. It's been taken advantage of by too many people and organisations for its own good. There are too many compromises, overrated, high priced garbage, satisfying self-interests.

Had champcar continued on from its last meaningful season (2002 imo), it just would've filled the gaps in the motor racing world that F1 can't do satisfactorily. It just would've balanced things out a bit worldwide, taken the pressure off and probably helped reduce the costs of F1.

In 02, it was close, but probably still another decade of consolidation away from being a WC without the WC status/glory. 2 WC, with offsetting strengths/weaknesses, would've been better than F1 as it is and has been, and the way Champcar/Indy racing has been.

The lack of another mammoth series shows up in many ways. For myself as an Australian, having to read comments elsewhere from lame Australian fans moaning about Oscar Piastri not getting a F1 drive having won the F2 championship (Even from Piastri himself).

For me, it's an unfortunate situation for him, but the way of the land as it is. Personally, it shouldn't be a big deal to go and race Indycars. But there's such a snottiness towards Indycars that F1 centric people/fans lose their minds and rational thought.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

Watching a few youtube videos and reading some articles about the Champcar/IRL split. The thought came to mind that one of the weaknesses for F1 nowadays (ironically) is that Champcar/CART hasn't emerged as a proper alternative, or even a priority, top tier racing series. Effectively an American F1 world championship.

The world is too big for F1. It has to be all things to all people, be everywhere all the time. It's been taken advantage of by too many people and organisations for its own good. There are too many compromises, overrated, high priced garbage, satisfying self-interests.

Had champcar continued on from its last meaningful season (2002 imo), it just would've filled the gaps in the motor racing world that F1 can't do satisfactorily. It just would've balanced things out a bit worldwide, taken the pressure off and probably helped reduce the costs of F1.

In 02, it was close, but probably still another decade of consolidation away from being a WC without the WC status/glory. 2 WC, with offsetting strengths/weaknesses, would've been better than F1 as it is and has been, and the way Champcar/Indy racing has been.

The lack of another mammoth series shows up in many ways. For myself as an Australian, having to read comments elsewhere from lame Australian fans moaning about Oscar Piastri not getting a F1 drive having won the F2 championship (Even from Piastri himself).

For me, it's an unfortunate situation for him, but the way of the land as it is. Personally, it shouldn't be a big deal to go and race Indycars. But there's such a snottiness towards Indycars that F1 centric people/fans lose their minds and rational thought.

You say: ''Had champcar continued on from its last meaningful season (2002 imo), it just would've filled the gaps in the motor racing world that F1 can't do satisfactorily. It just would've balanced things out a bit worldwide, taken the pressure off and probably helped reduce the costs of F1.''

What is this gap in the motor racing world, that F1 can't fill satisfactorily?

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

You say: ''Had champcar continued on from its last meaningful season (2002 imo), it just would've filled the gaps in the motor racing world that F1 can't do satisfactorily. It just would've balanced things out a bit worldwide, taken the pressure off and probably helped reduce the costs of F1.''

What is this gap in the motor racing world, that F1 can't fill satisfactorily?

The calendar for one. The increased schedule generates a weakness. Races become disposable and following the series monotonous. Even last year's title race dragged on a bit.

It's easier for genuine car racing fans to follow 32 consecutive weeks of racing, with two lots of 16 F1 races and hypothetical champcar series, than it is just following 20+ F1 races.

Then there's opportunities for drivers. All there is 20 F1 seats, and the turnover is low. If F1 & Champ/Indycars were comparable series, then there'd be about 50 opportunities for the professional driver.

I mentioned Oscar Piastri before, and he's an example. He's the F2 champ, and can't get a drive in F1, and in amongst Aus race fans, it's like the world has ended. Big crying sessions all over the web.

If there's no opportunity in F1, he should just race Indycars and continue unabated and it shouldn't be a big deal. But Indycars has regressed so much that there are Australian fans that lament that you can't continue competing in F2 after winning it, and begrudge that old man Alonso still keeps the Alpine drive.

It's a lame view won how people perceive the motor racing world.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

The calendar for one. The increased schedule generates a weakness. Races become disposable and following the series monotonous. Even last year's title race dragged on a bit.

It's easier for genuine car racing fans to follow 32 consecutive weeks of racing, with two lots of 16 F1 races and hypothetical champcar series, than it is just following 20+ F1 races.

Then there's opportunities for drivers. All there is 20 F1 seats, and the turnover is low. If F1 & Champ/Indycars were comparable series, then there'd be about 50 opportunities for the professional driver.

I mentioned Oscar Piastri before, and he's an example. He's the F2 champ, and can't get a drive in F1, and in amongst Aus race fans, it's like the world has ended. Big crying sessions all over the web.

If there's no opportunity in F1, he should just race Indycars and continue unabated and it shouldn't be a big deal. But Indycars has regressed so much that there are Australian fans that lament that you can't continue competing in F2 after winning it, and begrudge that old man Alonso still keeps the Alpine drive.

It's a lame view won how people perceive the motor racing world.

IndyCar hasn't regressed at all, in fact quite the opposite. Look where the series is now, compared to where it was in 2008. Back then it was on its knees and since reunification there has been an amazing turn around, so much so, IndyCar is now attracting F1 drivers who can't get a drive in F1. There's nothing to stop Oscar Piastri from racing in IndyCar and continuing unabated.

[Greem]

Given that the non-US based single seater ladder is entirely based around getting to the FIA championships and thence into F1, I'm not entirely surprised that Piastri's fans are a bit sour on him not getting a seat.

However, have they forgotten the number of Aussies in IndyCar right now? McLaughlin's doing pretty well, and there's this long-term driver... Pill Wower, I think?

IndyCar is in rude health compared to where it's been before. I do agree that there's nothing - apart from the availability of a seat - stopping any F2 drivers crossing the pond. They'd be in good company!

[Rusty Nail]

Hopefully McLauchlin's presence in IndyCar doesn't count for the Aussie fans because he's a Kiwi. Just like Dixon.

I hope nobody's claiming either of the Scotts as an Aussie. Jeez, the Aussies like to claim ownership to many of our iconic Kiwi successes. From racehorses to pavlova and everything in between!

I can understand the angst over Piastri, he was consistent and superb in his rookie season. Knowing he wasn't going to get a F1 drive 2022 would he have been better strategically to throw the Championship so he could come back this year for another year's seat time in F2? Just wondering.....

[bathurst77]

Originally Posted by Rusty Nail

Hopefully McLauchlin's presence in IndyCar doesn't count for the Aussie fans because he's a Kiwi. Just like Dixon.

I hope nobody's claiming either of the Scotts as an Aussie. Jeez, the Aussies like to claim ownership to many of our iconic Kiwi successes. From racehorses to pavlova and everything in between!

I can understand the angst over Piastri, he was consistent and superb in his rookie season. Knowing he wasn't going to get a F1 drive 2022 would he have been better strategically to throw the Championship so he could come back this year for another year's seat time in F2? Just wondering.....

We only claim them when they are good.. look at Russell Crowe
2 Australian newspaper headlines

"Aussie actor wins Oscar"
"kiwi actor in phone throwing scandal"

As to the other Oscar, Piastri, I think his place as Alpine #3 is a great place for him this year.A year as f1 test/spare will teach and prepare him more than another year in f2. He can do test days (very important with the new cars), simulator, preseason test, a few friday P1s, and build a relationship with the team management and crew. Slowly come to terms with driving f1 without the pressure of the world watching his every move.
And he can learn so much from Nando and occon.

Plus if either cant race at any time (very possible with covid) he is most likely to be thrown the keys. Perhaps he could race carts or something on the side to keep the axe sharp.

By 2023 he should be all set for a full time f1 drive... im hoping his manager is already shopping him.

[Rusty Nail]

Yes 77. I think you are probably 100% correct on all counts.

[S griffin]

Indycar really has recovered from the hangover of the split. It really has come a long way. Even if it is not quite where it was during the glory days pre-split, it certainly has bought enough of the fans back.

[Greem]

Ha! My mistake, I genuinely forgot McLaughlin is a Kiwi. Doh!

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

IndyCar hasn't regressed at all, in fact quite the opposite. Look where the series is now, compared to where it was in 2008.

I mentioned 2002, and you want to cherry-pick 2008?

However good it seems to you, it's still distinctly inferior to champcar up to 2002.

I'm talking about a series that is almost as big a deal as F1, of which champcar was getting there, but imo, probably another decade away from.

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Back then it was on its knees and since reunification there has been an amazing turn around, so much so, IndyCar is now attracting F1 drivers who can't get a drive in F1.

How's that any different to the last 40 years?

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

There's nothing to stop Oscar Piastri from racing in IndyCar and continuing unabated.

Except a lack of consciousness to give it consideration. The balance is way more F1-centric these days.

Then there's the structure the FIA has put in place to get into F1 (As Greem has pointed out), and his manager (As big a F1 snob there is in motor racing).