Let them race or better driving standards?

[Casper]

It could be said that the drivers are not paid to race but to win and if they did not do this then questions would be asked as to why he left room and lost the race. The sport has gone beyond racing is now all about winning but that is just my lopsided view and I see both things as separate goals.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

It could be said that the drivers are not paid to race but to win and if they did not do this then questions would be asked as to why he left room and lost the race. The sport has gone beyond racing is now all about winning but that is just my lopsided view and I see both things as separate goals.

There clearly is some levels of racing... generally amateur... in which the participant knows there is zero chance of "winning" and that participation is the goal. A win for them might be to finish the race, to finish in a better position than they qualified, or maybe just have some good wheel to wheel action at some point.

But at a pro level, and in particular F1. I can't see any difference between "racing" and "winning". You "race" to "win". If ANYONE is in F1 to just drive around and have a good time, then they should not be in the sport. Clearly there are some who race that know they are not in a car that can win. The competition they are in is to climb the ladder. They have made it to F1, now they need to climb the F1 ladder.

I believe there was an era in the history of F1 in which gentlemen drivers DID just drive around at the back just to have a good time (not that they were not trying). Is that your point when you say...

"The sport has gone beyond racing"

Richard

[Richard C]

Casper... After re-reading your post and my reply, I suspect we are on the same page in that... Driver are not paid to drive around, leave room and act particularly "gentlemanly". They are paid to win and they are racing to win and will take ANY gap they can find and WILL push the envelope.

Driving fully to the rules in some textbook style will result in getting pushed out of the way. In short... not a recipe for success.

Richard

[chillibowl]

i dont know...why should it be different then any other job?

some give more effort then what their pay requires some give less, some are working up the ladder at the start of their careers while others nearer to the end may look at it differently. some are pay drivers, some are journeymen while others are win at all costs.

i would suggest that Kimi is one of if not the most fair drivers out there in terms of always leaving the correct amount of space and his motivations are a mystery but imo it comes across as something more noble then about just winning.

at the sharp end at least, if you are spending a half billion a year then you need to put a killer in that first chair. Vettee used to be like that, LH likes to act like he is not like that, and Max is apologetically all about that.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i dont know...why should it be different then any other job?

Right

Originally Posted by chillibowl

some give more effort then what their pay requires some give less, some are working up the ladder at the start of their careers while others nearer to the end may look at it differently. some are pay drivers, some are journeymen while others are win at all costs.

We all know those who are "go-getters" who do more than expected (and usually have a positive trend in their career) and those who just... do enough to get by.

But in the end, you are right that it's a bit more complex than my simplistic (race to win, or get out) mantra. But I will say F1 is a bit more dog eat dog than most days at the office (maybe only slightly more )

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i would suggest that Kimi is one of if not the most fair drivers out there in terms of always leaving the correct amount of space and his motivations are a mystery but imo it comes across as something more noble then about just winning.

I put Kimi in a special category. While we may never know what is going on in his head... He may be pretty much as he portrays himself... Doing it for fun and along the way he generally is a gentlemen about it. I think he tends to give people room. But he is also not shy to complain when others don't do as he expects. It's just why we love him. Also what makes him special is that while he may do it for fun, he is generally pretty good at it. What is NOT good is those who do it for fun, but suck at it.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

at the sharp end at least, if you are spending a half billion a year then you need to put a killer in that first chair. Vettee used to be like that, LH likes to act like he is not like that, and Max is apologetically all about that.

I agree that while F1 is living in rarefied air... being at the very pointy end (currently Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull) you are expected to be the best of the best and to excel on all fronts. Have killer instinct, be ruthless and selfish. Being a nice guy helps only when out of the car and in front of a camera or when with a sponsor.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

But I will say F1 is a bit more dog eat dog than most days at the office (maybe only slightly more )

true...far fewer places to hide in the F1 fishbowl!

millions are not watching me strategically cutting off a co worker from getting to the bathroom before me...although i suspect many will identify with the race i have to run every day!

things can get pretty ruthless in a small office!

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I agree that while F1 is living in rarefied air... being at the very pointy end (currently Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull) you are expected to be the best of the best and to excel on all fronts. Have killer instinct, be ruthless and selfish. Being a nice guy helps only when out of the car and in front of a camera or when with a sponsor.

indeed but as these traits are required for a top driver, do you think that it increases the incentive for young drivers to show from the get go that they also have those traits?

i do wonder if Ocon would have an easier time finding a seat if he had punched Max back? i cant help but feel that by backing down he did irreparable harm to his F1 career.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

indeed but as these traits are required for a top driver, do you think that it increases the incentive for young drivers to show from the get go that they also have those traits?

I don't think it's required, but I think it can be shown to be a good strategy. Take two drivers...

A = Very naturally talented. Lets say a 10 out of 10.
B = Also talented, but maybe not as much as driver A. Lets say he is a 9 out of 10

Driver B can potentially push the envelope (talking driving standards here) a bit more than driver A and achieve the same results. Maybe pull off that pass that otherwise wouldn't have been possible.

With there likely being more of type B than A, you will see they will likely learn which behavior rewards them. That still leaves room for driver A to still rise to the top and be the best. So it's not a requirement. I do thing those who are less than the best AND play nicely is the definition of a looser in F1. (Note... I am not advocating for poor driving standards)

What about those drivers who are very naturally talented AND push the envelope with respect to driving standards on occasion? They might have names like... Schumacher, Senna, etc.

Richard

[chillibowl]

also not advocating for poor driving standards but maybe i am.

as a fan i want to see the killers out there and for the most part that is who im going to support, whose kit i might buy, the reason i will continue to pay the tv subscription etc. their behaviour is what i will reward.

looking back at my earlier posts advocating on the side of more black and white rules/less discretion while now also advocating for what is essentially dangerous driving/aggressive tactics...i must acknowledged that these two positions are probably not compatible.

i must now admit im not entirely sure what i would like to see vis a vis 'let them race' vs 'better driving standards'.

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

The 1 million posts generated after every race incident on here are more interesting and action packed than most races...

if im being honest, i guess it is this...i just want to be entertained and have something to talk about while being less concerned about how it is created.

[Taxi645]

i must now admit im not entirely sure what i would like to see vis a vis 'let them race' vs 'better driving standards'

Same here. I think the urge to start this thread was trigged by the fact that I suspect many expect too much from a blunt "let them race" approach. I mean every approach has its pro's and con's.

Generally I think people have become more oppinionated (guilty) and there is less respect/acceptance for deciscions by officials in life. We demand a full explanation, without giving the same scrutiny to our own opinion/arguments.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Casper... After re-reading your post and my reply, I suspect we are on the same page in that... Driver are not paid to drive around, leave room and act particularly "gentlemanly". They are paid to win and they are racing to win and will take ANY gap they can find and WILL push the envelope.

Driving fully to the rules in some textbook style will result in getting pushed out of the way. In short... not a recipe for success.

Richard

That's about it, imagine the Ferrari reaction if Vettel or Leclerc gave room for someone to pass them and that single event lost a championship. I think we need some aggro in "racing", these guys come out of karting where it is a full on war from the flag drop, move it or lose type of war then we expect them to forget over 10 years of that just because they happen to be F1 drivers? F1 fans should go and watch a club kart race, there was one particular class where we raced that everyone stopped work and watched because of the potential for on track biff and barge and when fellow racers take time to watch you knew you had good exciting racing. A mate of mine used to say that if he looked lile losing the start which he rarely did he deliberately caused a problem to get another one.

Take that thinking that has been trained into these guys and expect an attitude change when they get to F1 is a bit much to expect and anyone who has not raced cannot understand that competitive people have one goal, to win at any cost. Sure the rougher edges get smoother as they mature but the training and mind games never leave them and it is futile to think it would. Karting is a contact sport, always has been and will never change and the training is what got them into F1 and now they are expected to change? Good luck with that.

[V8 Fireworks]

You can't just overtake off the track -- twice. Double penalty for Ricciardo IMO.

[TrapezeArtist]

"Track limits" is one of the biggest causes of the problems we are discussing. (Note to anyone who wants to jump down my throat: I said "one of".)

If drivers stayed rigorously within track limits at all times, and there was a natural penalty for exceeding them (as opposed to a judicial penalty), they would have to play more nicely. Unfortunately safety and other pressures have taken F1, and all other motor racing, in the opposite direction so we now have innocuous kerbs that every driver ignores, a painted white line that they ignore even more, and acres of tarmac run-off that encourages over-the-limit driving.

F1 drivers are good enough to be able to position their car to within a couple of inches. Therefore giving them any more space than that (like wide flat kerbs) just encourages them to take their car beyond. Obviously raised kerbs at trackside (like we all manage to cope with on the road) would do the job but I can't see it getting past the safety-police. But what about a sharp drop-off at the edge of the track of say 100-150mm? Putting a wheel off would be too time-consuming to be done deliberately but not hazardous. A full four-wheels-off incident could be restrained by tarmac run-off, there would be no unsafe rejoining of the track because that would require jumping up the step and a sensible time-penalty would be enforced by the need to go to the ramp back up onto the track.

[S griffin]

I agree, the deterrent isn't enough. If they want drivers to stay within the white lines, they shouldn't keep putting ridiculous amount of asphalt run off

[VIVA GT]

I think the main problem here (and this doesn't just refer to F1, it is all over life) is that everything HAS to be regulated. You can do X, but cannot do Y, no one is allowed to use what we used to call 'common sense', there has to be a regulation defining what is right & what is wrong. Then a load of time can be used arguing that although it looked like the driver had done Y (so was guilty), in actual fact, he was soing X, so is innocent.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

"Track limits" is one of the biggest causes of the problems we are discussing. (Note to anyone who wants to jump down my throat: I said "one of".)

If drivers stayed rigorously within track limits at all times, and there was a natural penalty for exceeding them (as opposed to a judicial penalty), they would have to play more nicely.

i know i have been a bit back and forth on this but i agree. there should be a natural penalty for going out of bounds...like there is for literally every other sport.

a natural penalty is a nice way to phrase it as well!

in the moment going out of bounds should be an immediate infraction regardless of intent, who pushed whom, if it was an accident or avoiding action, even if no one is around or if no advantage was gained.

surely the technology now exists to track all the cars in real time and immediately apply a natural penalty to any infraction (of course though there needs to be debate about what that penalty should bes - rather what is the appropriate version of an F1 throw in/side out of bounds/DQ for breaking you lane in a race?).

may seem harsh and those who are doing it aggressively or consistently can be further penalized, DQ, banned, fined, points on their licence etc.

but this is sport and there is no crying in baseball!

[Purist]

The trouble is, unlike other sports/games, you don't have set plays and full stops and starts and such between them. Even in the most neutralized states of racing, a crash can still occur. In other words, you can't reset to zero in the same way you can in other things. Also, you're piloting a machine, over which you can't have the same level of control that you do just your own body. Not to mention mechanical issues do happen, potentially with massively more complexity than merely a broken tennis racket.

Anyway, a "natural penalty" should be just that, natural and automatic, without need for the stewards to even get involved.

As to Trapeze's thoughts, uneven grading is a danger; the FIA regs on circuits specifically call for smooth transitions. Also, the motorcycles won't go for that, or higher curbs. At least, that's the response I often get thrown back at me.

I get Taxi's initial point about racing with good dices, and honestly, it's not all a bad thing from the teams/manufacturers side. After all, having a really memorable film clip is great for promotional material, and even better if those watching your spot get their blood going a little bit.

However, a lot of the newer Tilke designs just don't lend themselves to those side-by-side duels. You need long, fast sweepers for that stuff, but so many of his layouts are rather broken up by tight, angular, single-line corners that also have a strong tendency to spread the cars out on corner exit.

Even these newer quick corners have the trouble of those multiple apexes pinching the racing line, as we saw a few years ago when Verstappen tried to make a fast and spectacular move at Austin, and got penalized for cutting one of the apexes.

Furthermore, Sepang, the track in the clip Taxi referenced, was one of Tilke's earlier works, and while it had more smooth corner profiles overall, it also had fewer corners and fewer ultra-slow corners than a number of his later efforts. I think that relative simplicity definitely helped to an extent; I'd actually kind of like to see how F1 would go at Buriram for those reasons.

As to the title topic of the thread, the answer probably lies somewhere in between. You can't have good racing where guys actually push and push each other hard if you punish honest mistakes that stem from simply pushing hard.

And of course, blatant blocks, chops, and disregard for track limits on a continuing basis need to be slapped down. Maybe the 2007 ChampCar rules were a bit too far toward one end of the spectrum, but saying that the driver in front gets only one move, which must be done preemptively rather than in reaction, seems like an okay starting point to look at it.

And clearly, missing a chicane in part or whole to avoid a crash in progress, or one that looks likely to happen, is understood, but blowing by half a dozen competitors by cutting the course without any apparent effort to significantly reduce speed is obviously not on. A reasonable evasion doesn't rise to the level of cheating.

And it should come as no surprise that I'm in the grass verges and gravel run-offs camp. That would take care of the immediate issue here right off. And also, in truth, this whole mess in Montreal could have at least been mitigated by simply giving the stewards the ability to freely select a penalty, including the option to tell the drivers to swap places.

One other thing I'm definitely as in favor of as I've ever been is having just the one Chief Steward who oversees all the races. You might have a couple of guest Advisory Stewards at each race (former racers to give their input), but leave the final call to the same individual at the end of the day.

[S griffin]

Well the FIA are reviewing whether to change the rules in 2020 regarding rejoining the track, so let's hope they strike the right balance between as the thread says, letting them race and better driving standards

[chillibowl]

i dont think the play needs to be stopped but just an automatic addition of time. this is certainly more lenient then an automatic DQ which is, i believe, the norm for foot races and sailing/rowing events.

and can be applied automatically whenever a transponder crosses outside the track limits. and the virtue of it being a race i do think this is something the audience can follow along with and understand....maybe not though.

Originally Posted by Purist

However, a lot of the newer Tilke designs just don't lend themselves to those side-by-side duels. You need long, fast sweepers for that stuff, but so many of his layouts are rather broken up by tight, angular, single-line corners that also have a strong tendency to spread the cars out on corner exit....

fair point...penalizing the driver for trying something on a track not designed to allow for it per say is also an issue that needs to be addressed.

probably something that needs to be addressed first actually.

[Akrapovic]

I feel like the last couple of races have been some sort of weird joke.

Vettel was penalised for rejoining unsafely, despite being out of control. Fine, everyone obey the rules to the letter. That's how it is.

So at Paul Ricard, Perez runs off the road and goes around the bollard like he has to...and is penalised for making up positions anyway. So Perez obeyed the rules, but because someone at the FIA did the maths wrong on how long it'd take to go around the bollard, he still is penalised? So do you need to take into account how badly written the rules are too?

After returning to F1 after seeing the very well made Netflix series, I've been reminded that the Netflix series didn't show this sort of insulting mess. My overwhelming feeling now isn't anger or whatever, it's just "meh".

[sizzle]

Just thought I would bump this thread.

Whilst not a Max fan, I can't argue given I wanted to let them race.