[Rules] DRS: Is it time for it to go?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I don’t think shortening lap times is a problem, although teams are very keen to maximise their strategy. The drivers are often at the mercy of what the teams want to do. Their impact has been lessened

If a braking zone is reduced in time by 50% you don't think that presents a problem for a driver who would like to use it to pass someone? Truly?

You must be one of those that believe that faster laps mean better racing, I am sorry to disappoint you but it is exactly the opposite in practise. It is so obvious I can't work out why there is nothing spoken about it to tell the truth.

[S griffin]

Good point there. To be fair I don't see why laptimes need to be so low. I often refer to MotoGP. Their laptimes pale into significance compared to F1, but no one notices. They look fast enough without needing to be ridiculously fast and the spectacle is a lot better as a result

[bathurst77]

I would prefer a return to the old KERs or a push to pass. Whereby drivers have a Limited amount of extra power they can use at their discretion, but once you have used up your share, its gone for the day.

Means that the car behind doesnt automatically have an advantage but is an extra tactic and interest for the race.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

I would prefer a return to the old KERs or a push to pass. Whereby drivers have a Limited amount of extra power they can use at their discretion, but once you have used up your share, its gone for the day.

Means that the car behind doesnt automatically have an advantage but is an extra tactic and interest for the race.

Again, agreed. If we have to have artificiality built in for a driver to be able to overtake another driver, then that surely has to be limited. 'Breeze-past' DRS, available for almost the entire race has to go....

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Casper

The manic headlong rush to reduce lap times is the single cause of this problem and it is only going to get worse. Of course those who want to see exciting racing always want to see faster cars but it is a self defeating ideal but carry on.

Is overtaking actually significantly better with the slower F2 cars or the much slower F3 cars?

From what I can tell the new generation F1 cars are at about the same level as F2 cars for ease of overtaking, despite the F2 cars being 10 seconds per lap slower.

I don't watch F3 closely enough to know if they race much better than the other two classes.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Is overtaking actually significantly better with the slower F2 cars or the much slower F3 cars?

From what I can tell the new generation F1 cars are at about the same level as F2 cars for ease of overtaking, despite the F2 cars being 10 seconds per lap slower.

I don't watch F3 closely enough to know if they race much better than the other two classes.

If the lower classes have the same problem then they are too fast as well. I don't pretend to know the answer I am just highlighting the problem. Micro management within the category is another problem ass well but that does not seem to be a discussion point either for some reason.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Casper

If the lower classes have the same problem then they are too fast as well.

Wow.

It would be possible in F1 to ban aerofoils entirely like in Formula Ford. That would drop peak lateral g from 5G to about 1.5G.

The laptimes would increase by about 25-35 seconds per lap. It's certainly an option, but do you think spectators, drivers and competitors would really have an appetite for that?

In the era of 1.5L Grand Prix cars, the drivers were some of the first people to complain about the cars being too slow IIRC, hence the decision to adopt a 3.0L formula (even larger than the 2.5L which the 1.5 regulation replaced) after just five seasons of 1.5L.

The drivers were again complaining in 2014 that the cars were too slow and not stimulating to drive, hence the desire to increase downforce in 2017.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Wow.

It would be possible in F1 to ban aerofoils entirely like in Formula Ford. That would drop peak lateral g from 5G to about 1.5G.

The laptimes would increase by about 25-35 seconds per lap. It's certainly an option, but do you think spectators, drivers and competitors would really have an appetite for that?

In the era of 1.5L Grand Prix cars, the drivers were some of the first people to complain about the cars being too slow IIRC, hence the decision to adopt a 3.0L formula (even larger than the 2.5L which the 1.5 regulation replaced) after just five seasons of 1.5L.

The drivers were again complaining in 2014 that the cars were too slow and not stimulating to drive, hence the desire to increase downforce in 2017.

No one is going to remove the aero load from open wheelers that are already using it and going faster is a human goal, no one wants to go slower at all. Accepting that means artificial means have to be introduced to encourage more action or so the fans reckon and one thing that might encourage a bit of unpredictability would be to remove all driver controls from the steering wheel and remove all radio communication between car & pits from the car. Race control could still have a simple radio link to the cars but no one else.

Because we won't slow down to allow better RACING let's see some radical moves that make the driver do the driving on his own and work out his own tactics. The drivers haven't had to do it for decades and I think it would make for an interesting way to get some variation in the results. None of this would happen of course because it is all dreamland stuff but it sure would be good.

[Aysedasi]

Yep, I'd support it.... But you're right, It will never happen.

[Casper]

Getting back to the basics I described could be looked at as removing artificial aids but some might disagree.

[GT6]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Yep, I'd support it.... But you're right, It will never happen.

Pity but as you said the officials/teams like to meddle and leaving things up to the guy/girl in the car is beyound thier imagination.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by GT6

Pity but as you said the officials/teams like to meddle and leaving things up to the guy/girl in the car is beyond their imagination.

Maybe the driver's championship should be done away with as most of the decisions and management are done by the pit wall.

[S griffin]

The drivers championship is what the fans care more about, but they are now less able to do their own strategy and have the team do it for them

[bathurst77]

I dont know if things like kers push to pass etc are artificial.
I mean pitting for softs knowing they have limited range is like push to pass - it gives a speed advantage for a short time, so has to be played as a tactic.

And back in the refuelling days weight vs need for another stop was a tactics thing that was played

even winding the engine up and getting more power but hoping it doesnt blow up is a tactic.

There is always a way of going faster - briefly - that has to be planned if and when it is used. Push to pass or kers is just another. (or a Bottle of nitrous... hehehe)

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

There is always a way of going faster - briefly - that has to be planned if and when it is used. Push to pass or kers is just another. (or a Bottle of nitrous... hehehe)

That's the point though isn't it - planning the use - DRS (apart from a few laps at the start - normally) is available for everyone throughout the race, that's extreme artificiality.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

I dont know if things like kers push to pass etc are artificial.

Agree. Frankly it's all "artificial".

Originally Posted by bathurst77

There is always a way of going faster - briefly - that has to be planned if and when it is used. Push to pass or kers is just another. (or a Bottle of nitrous... hehehe)

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

That's the point though isn't it - planning the use - DRS (apart from a few laps at the start - normally) is available for everyone throughout the race, that's extreme artificiality.

I struggle to understand how DRS is not like what bathurst calls out above. Application of throttle, brake and something like DRS are all to be applied at the right moment. Now the detection zone, 1 second rule, etc. you might say are more artificial than throttle or brake. But they (all of them... throttle, brake, DRS) are also tied to the circuit design... which is artificial in itself.

If you can't tell. I think call out just DRS as "artificial" makes little sense to me.

Richard

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

If you can't tell. I think call out just DRS as "artificial" makes little sense to me.

Richard

We don't disagree often, but we clearly do on this. DRS is basically 'push to sail past' whenever you like in any of the DRS zones. Some of those zones are absurd in the manner in which they allow passes to be performed. I should stress that I'm not comparing it with what 'device' is employed in any other series or category of racing. Any such device is artificial, to a greater or lesser extent in that making it available reduces the skill a driver needs to make a pass. But making it available for virtually an entire race, in several places on a circuit - it's just overkill.

[Greem]

I've said it many times, but motor racing is *all* artificial. The only "pure" form of racing would be naked humans without shoes running against each other, and even then there are ways to artificially enhance performance!

I've also said this before: if we must have DRS, instead of the silly detection and deployment zones, just give each driver in the field a time allowance. Use it anywhere, to attack or defend, but once it's gone - it's gone.

Or they could do away with it altogether and adopt Indy-style power boost push-to-pass; that will of course never happen because Not Invented Here syndrome is very strong in F1.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

We don't disagree often, but we clearly do on this. DRS is basically 'push to sail past' whenever you like in any of the DRS zones.

Isn't that the same thing for the throttle? Both drivers can use it and both can push to pass when the correct conditions exist? If you are the lead driver with no DRS and the trailing driver has it, they can pass you. If you are the lead driver and you are not using your throttle (corner entry) and the driver behind you keeps his foot in it a bit later and passes. Is that not similar?

I know people could rip me on this comparison. And now, I am not saying that throttle, brakes and DRS are "equal", but the conditions in which they can be used are equally applied to each driver.

I also understand everyone is not going to agree on these points.

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Some of those zones are absurd in the manner in which they allow passes to be performed. I should stress that I'm not comparing it with what 'device' is employed in any other series or category of racing. Any such device is artificial, to a greater or lesser extent in that making it available reduces the skill a driver needs to make a pass. But making it available for virtually an entire race, in several places on a circuit - it's just overkill.

Overall, I am not arguing for DRS. Mostly that I think any argument that it is uniquely artificial can be torn down pretty quickly. I am not particularly a fan of DRS. I do think that there is likely to continue to need to be some type of "assist" given how optimally the cars of similar pace can be driven.

Richard

[chillibowl]

imo DRS successfully addresses the systemic design flaws now very much built into the DNA of F1 and to this point, i suspect if one goes through the rate the race threads, those races that have the highest scores (typically races where you get close racing at the end or stellar drives through the field) were ones massively aided by the use of DRS.

and its been around for a bit over a decade now and has improved tremendously in that time so i suppose i have accepted it as part of F1. until it ruins more races then it saves im not sure im inclined to changed my acceptance of it.

i think it makes the races far more dynamic particularly over the past 2-3 seasons.

so at this point, i might even say im more a fan of it then i would say its just something i tolerate.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Greem

Or they could do away with it altogether and adopt Indy-style power boost push-to-pass; that will of course never happen because Not Invented Here syndrome is very strong in F1.

I tend to agree that P2P is a better solution and the "not invented here" issue is probably a large factor in preventing it from showing up in F1.

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

And now, I am not saying that throttle, brakes and DRS are "equal"...

I didn't see the above typo until it was too late to fix. I meant to say "And no, I am not"

Richard

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Isn't that the same thing for the throttle? Both drivers can use it and both can push to pass when the correct conditions exist?

No, I don't think so. Application of throttle (and brake) at the right time have been part of the essential skills of racing drivers since racing began. Having a hole appear in your rear wing at set points on a circuit every lap is just that - there is no skill whatsoever involved and the pass which follows is soulless, 'spice it up for the viewers because they must have lots of overtaking' artificiality.

I agree though, DRS is not uniquely artificial. The rule set, the cars and the circuits all impose artificiality, but DRS is (for me) the worst example, which I have found increasingly offensive, particularly recently. I'm not a 'purist' but I think we all know something isn't quite right when the driver's skill married with the capabilities of his car has to be enhanced in this way. I guess we just have to accept that 'not quite right' is how it has to be, it's just how the 'not quite right' is currently managed that isn't...... quite right. Maybe I've been watching too much from Goodwood.....

[chillibowl]

I think you are underestimating the difficulty of getting to and staying under 1 sec behind a car you are following….and still then a pass is not a guarantee.

Much more to affecting a pass then just the pass itself.

[Aysedasi]

I don't think so. It generally looks pretty easy from what I've been watching in the last few years. And most times, when within the 1 second, the pass is pretty close to a guarantee, IMO.

I just think DRS is a totally garbage dumbed-down way of giving drivers more opportunity to pass. But that doesn't mean that I have an ideal solution!

[chillibowl]

If it was easy to follow they wouldn’t have needed to change the rules/design this season no?

while we may be watching the same thing it’s clear we are seeing it very differently. All good of course!