One-move rule to become part of F1 regulations

[thunderbolt]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns23668.html

A concrete definition of Formula 1's so-called 'one move rule' laid down by the FIA's Sporting Working Group is to be written into the 2012 Sporting Regulations.
There has been controversy over whether, having moved to defend position, drivers are permitted to revert back to the ideal racing line approaching the following corner, or whether that constitutes a second move.

[TrapezeArtist]

About time too!

[Adam43]

I wait to see the rule, but I worry it will show no sympathy for the art of racing.

Not least because I've seen some bloody dangerous one moves!

[wnut]

Originally Posted by thunderbolt

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns23668.html

Quote:
"A concrete definition of Formula 1's so-called 'one move rule' laid down by the FIA's Sporting Working Group is to be written into the 2012 Sporting Regulations.
There has been controversy over whether, having moved to defend position, drivers are permitted to revert back to the ideal racing line approaching the following corner, or whether that constitutes a second move."

I thought that this was a fair interpretation TBH.
Think it has worked really well on the whole this year.



Quote Adam43:

"I wait to see the rule, but I worry it will show no sympathy for the art of racing.

Not least because I've seen some bloody dangerous one moves! "

I couldn't agree more. The art of the last millisecond chop!

[Wild Dog]

Why shouldn't it. It have been a "unofficial" rule until now, right? So it is time that it becomes a "official" rule.

[henners88]

The only real issue we've seen this season concerning this rule is Monza IMO where Schumacher chopped across the braking zone after making his one move on multiple occasions. Lewis has contributed to this too in 2 races where he's retaken the racing line and hit Massa and Kobay, but I think this rule is being put in place to make drivers more aware of their actions. Schumacher used the loophole to his advantage in Monza and Lewis was just plain silly by not checking his mirrors on the 2 occasions. I suppose drivers will be more aware and double check what they are about to do if they know a penalty is likely? Not that I want to see more penalties in F1 as this season we've had far too many unnecessary interventions as it is.

[Woolley]

If it includes a line to the effect of 'if another driver is forced to deviate from their line or adjust their speed as a result of your one move then you're not entitled to make it'. No waiting for the driver to commit or get alongside and then driving them off the circuit or making them brake to avoid a shunt.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Woolley

If it includes a line to the effect of 'if another driver is forced to deviate from their line or adjust their speed as a result of your one move then you're not entitled to make it'. No waiting for the driver to commit or get alongside and then driving them off the circuit or making them brake to avoid a shunt.

Currently applied:

20.2 Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as more than one change of direction to defend a position, deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.

16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and referred to the race director for investigation) which :
- necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41 ;
- constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code ;
- caused a false start by one or more cars ;
- caused a collision ;
- forced a driver off the track ;
- illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver ;

30.13 At no time may a car be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed
potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person. This will apply whether any such car is being
driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

[Bononi]

I think it's a good move from FIA.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Bononi

I think it's a good move from FIA.

Just so long as it's only one move.

[3point0v8]

Originally Posted by Woolley

If it includes a line to the effect of 'if another driver is forced to deviate from their line or adjust their speed as a result of your one move then you're not entitled to make it'. No waiting for the driver to commit or get alongside and then driving them off the circuit or making them brake to avoid a shunt.

Hopefully that will be an effect of making it official - they can really narrow down the definition and make it easier enforced.

[ensign14]

Originally Posted by henners88

The only real issue we've seen this season concerning this rule is Monza IMO where Schumacher chopped across the braking zone after making his one move on multiple occasions.

How about Vettel at the last start? Moves to push Button onto the grass and then moves back onto the racing line.

I don't see why it's so controversial that, if a driver is part-way alongside you, you do NOT deviate from the racing line. If he is not, you CAN deviate - but you can't go back onto it.

[henners88]

Originally Posted by ensign14

How about Vettel at the last start? Moves to push Button onto the grass and then moves back onto the racing line.

I do think that rule needs to be addressed to as starts don't seem to be covered under the regs. I don't think the one move rule needs to be applied to starts, but what Vettel did in Japan was idiotic IMO. We saw similar swerves during 2010, most notably at Silverstone where he tried it on his teammate before losing out big time by swerving into the side of Lewis from the outside. He lost out there because his tyre was destroyed and so was his race. He also tried a similar tactic at Hockenheim with Alonso but again the driver he was trying to intimidate didn't yield which meant Seb had to abort and lost places and time. He's had mostly good starts this season and Japan is the only time I can remember him doing this, but it needs to be addressed by the governing body because its far too aggressive to try and force opponents onto the grass when you haven't made a good start IMO.

[Purist]

The trouble with starts is that the field is bunched, and you just can't make a blanket rule that still allows drivers to do what they need to do to avoid shunts when some make good and others make not-so-good starts.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Bononi

I think it's a good move from FIA.

I believe a driver should be able to defend his or her position on the track, however how far that goes and how the FIA make a ruling on this is quite complex..

Why is it that we have raced for so many years without this being a problem in the past I wonder?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I believe a driver should be able to defend his or her position on the track, however how far that goes and how the FIA make a ruling on this is quite complex..

Why is it that we have raced for so many years without this being a problem in the past I wonder?

But there was a problem in the past...and it's back to haunt us in the present. Or do you not know who Michael Schumacher is.

It's actually because of some of the things that the 'great' drivers got up to in the past (Senna, Prost etc), and some not so great drivers (Eddie Irvine, etc) that we have much tighter regulations on driving etiquette at the present.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

But there was a problem in the past...and it's back to haunt us in the present. Or do you not know who Michael Schumacher is.

It's actually because of some of the things that the 'great' drivers got up to in the past (Senna, Prost etc), and some not so great drivers (Eddie Irvine, etc) that we have much tighter regulations on driving etiquette at the present.

Who is that then? Yes you have a good point..

I think he has been talking to Sebastian about his starts though...

[Adam43]

Well in the old days drivers didn't do it because it could hurt. So why don't we have a system where any contact produces a penalty for all involved, irrespective of fault. That replicates the old situation where all parties suffer. Of course the kind of suffering is different.
Perhaps the type of penalty could be dependent on g-sensors measuring the severity. Or dependent on the speed of the accident. Or maybe the penalty is random and different for all involved, replicating the random outcome in old crashes.
This could be a good deterrent. Risk a dodgy move and you might miss a race. And you have removed the subjective nature of the penalty.
Of course, this falls down if it does result in injury.

[Nortad]

Sorry Rene and Gilles, no place for you guys anymore...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl2tIFxSEGA