How to fix F1?

[bathurst77]

Surely in 2021 when you can buy a cheapand cheerful Korean or chinese hatchback with lane departure monitoring, they can fit a sensor that can see the white line. Or the white line could have a magnetic strip and the car a sensor. Thats for the boffins. If grandma's car knows when its over the line so can a GP car.

No "steering assist but if you go over anywhere a warning light flashes on your dash and the officials and your pit get an instant alert. If you do it more than 3 times it goes to chief steward or DSO judge and you cop a penalty unless it can be shown as unavoidable.

The rule should be .. theres a white line all the way around. if your car is completely on the wrong side youre out and we will see it - every corner every lap. None of this silly we will monitor turns 8 and 15 and 19 - On turn 8 its the red bit on 15 its the white line.. on 19 the stripes and on other corners.. who cares

The teams know to the mm how wide there car is so how far you can cross the line before you are out. All the way around the track, after a few infractions in friday saturday FP sessions, the drivers would quickly know too.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

Surely in 2021 when you can buy a cheapand cheerful Korean or chinese hatchback with lane departure monitoring, they can fit a sensor that can see the white line. Or the white line could have a magnetic strip and the car a sensor. Thats for the boffins. If grandma's car knows when its over the line so can a GP car.

No "steering assist but if you go over anywhere a warning light flashes on your dash and the officials and your pit get an instant alert. If you do it more than 3 times it goes to chief steward or DSO judge and you cop a penalty unless it can be shown as unavoidable.

The rule should be .. theres a white line all the way around. if your car is completely on the wrong side youre out and we will see it - every corner every lap. None of this silly we will monitor turns 8 and 15 and 19 - On turn 8 its the red bit on 15 its the white line.. on 19 the stripes and on other corners.. who cares

The teams know to the mm how wide there car is so how far you can cross the line before you are out. All the way around the track, after a few infractions in friday saturday FP sessions, the drivers would quickly know too.

Sorry, a good try but this is way too simple (and sensible) for Formula One. It has to be an overcomplicated system that is monitored by human beings to allow for inconsistent results. Otherwise forums like this would just close down due to lack of interest/posts

[bathurst77]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Sorry, a good try but this is way too simple (and sensible) for Formula One. It has to be an overcomplicated system that is monitored by human beings to allow for inconsistent results. Otherwise forums like this would just close down due to lack of interest/posts

Arrrghhh Viva, I KNEW there was a reason it couldnt be done! How bloody bone headed of me. I have following this sport 40 years, and I still make rookie errors.
I might have to swap for lawn bowls

[Adam43]

Typical F1. Complicated solution that probably isn’t perfect! Yet considered too simple for F1!

I do think they should consider developing it. But it’s not simple.

Will it be have problems like Hawkeye has (it’s not perfect)? I know it’s not the same system BTW, but the measurement may not be full proof.
Where do you fit it, every white line, every corner, every key part of a corner, just some corners?
What’s the cost?
Is it reliable?
Does it work in all conditions?
You would still need rules that decide when it is applied? What if forced off, what if a mistake happens and the car is clearly slower because of it, but also gets a penalty?, always on first lap?

Imagine the replays debating whether the system got it right!

See the jumped start solution. Which actually works, but still gets subjected to facts about how it doesn’t.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Imagine the replays debating whether the system got it right!

Right!

I suspect the outrage would be louder then the thing people were originally outraged by?

So that will be fun.

But seriously, i read the other day a robot will be monitoring and calling offsides at a world cup game...i would be surprised if F1 wasent already working on a similar A.I. system to regulate things like track limits.

This is already the direction of things no?

[S griffin]

I think the main problem is F1 is a little too over regulated at times. Racing incident constantly investigated, laps deleted for track limits every session. Really they should let them race and only punish incidents that have clear blame, rather than racing incidents. And keep tarmac runoff down to a minimum to get rid of track limit violations

I would be surprised if a robot does offside for a world cup game. We already have VAR and goal line tech to help with decisions. The problem is if you have computers making all the decisions, there would be no room for leeway in decisions, just the letter of the law. So that’s why you still need people to make the decisions

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

I suspect the outrage would be louder then the thing people were originally outraged by?

Just look to football for an example.

Football fans - Referees are human, they make errors, we need a better system to review judgemental errors. Surely technology can do something about it.
FIFA - Here's Video Assisted Refereeing (VAR), developed over a few years and allows replays with digitised overlays to provide obvious and clear decisions.
Football fans - VAR is rubbish. It ruins the flow of the game, decisions are made after the fact, players lose focus of the game, line calls are now based on millimetres.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

This is already the direction of things no?

I think you are right and they should look at it.

Although, as I often express, I am happy with a referee judgement decision. I actually believe that is appropriate for a sport.

I was just amused by the assertion it was a simple solution that was too simple for F1.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Just look to football for an example.

Football fans - Referees are human, they make errors, we need a better system to review judgemental errors. Surely technology can do something about it.
FIFA - Here's Video Assisted Refereeing (VAR), developed over a few years and allows replays with digitised overlays to provide obvious and clear decisions.
Football fans - VAR is rubbish. It ruins the flow of the game, decisions are made after the fact, players lose focus of the game, line calls are now based on millimetres.

lol yep that sounds about right. was like that with hockey for their goal reviews, NFL and NBA with their coaches challenges.

but i think with time and successful examples of its use the audience will come around as they have in other sports.

Originally Posted by Adam43

...I am happy with a referee judgement decision. I actually believe that is appropriate for a sport...

to this point, is it where the new tools become an automated feature rather then an 'assistant' to the human refs where the issue rests for most?

we all love racing technology but dont want to see cars that drive/race themselves...its the automation aspect of it which feels wrong.

but more specific to your point, is the current approach of just monitoring a couple of corners really ruining the racing/requires a new system to correct it?

personally, im not there yet. add some more tools to make the refs job easier, allow for an a.i. program to quickly pull the relevant data and footage so the stewards can make quicker decisions sure but for me, the human touch, despites its shortcomings, still largely works for me.



another side of this though would be, will constant monitoring and penalties for going off track make the racing/GP better?

while there is much merit in cars having to slow down to actually make all of these corners (this is what drivers should be doing), surely there will also be a knock on effect by everyone having to reduce corning speeds, reduced lap times, reduced overtaking opportunities etc.

granted some are in favour of slower lap times but this is, if i understand it correctly, is in order to make the racing better. if the path to reducing lap times doesnt make the racing better is it still worth it?

[Richard C]

I might be remembering this incorrectly. But there were a number of reasons to justify the paved sections beyond the edge of the circuit. One was safety in that you can slow on pavement vs. gravel or grass. Another (and this is my point) is that fans didn't like it when their favorite driver had an off and then was DNF due to either getting stuck in a gravel trap or couldn't slow enough and impacted a barrier. That the idea was to allow them to get back on track and back into action. As fans, you just can't please us.

Richard

[S griffin]

As I said it's not so much tarmac runoff that's the problem, but the track limits. People are just getting fed up with them now it seems. There was a time when track limits were only imposed if you cut a chicane. Now it seems to be everywhere

[crmalcolm]

Where do we stop the wheel?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Where do we stop the wheel?

haha thats great...will admit to feeling or saying several of those things. sometimes at the same time and sometimes at different times!

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Where do we stop the wheel?

Its a vicious circle.

Richard

[chillibowl]

figured i would post my response to Taxi645's post here as this is probably a better place for my rant then in the race thread!

Originally Posted by Taxi645

Into: The top ten finishing driver who sets the fastest lap gets an extra point.

That way finishing points loss are always in play and we do not get the artificial none normal race occurrences of last lap pit stops, just to keep a competitor from a point. That said, I wouldn't mind if the extra point for fastest lap is completely removed either.

you give teams more time with any rule and they will find a way to game the system. part of me likes this and makes me amenable to the need for constant rule changes and tweaks.

personally i already think that quali is a bit unbalanced in that the driver who manages the fastest lap time overall is not guaranteed pole unless that fastest lap occurs in Q3...but at the same time i get why they need to mess around with the tire rules for the top ten starters.

so on one hand im not bothered by who gets fastest lap as overall it doesnt seem to matter much anyways....although i suspect they like flashing the 'fastest lap' icon on the screen as much as possible.

but if they are going to give out a point for it during the race, then i agree with you....a driver should not be able to sacrifice their finishing position in order to deny someone else a point. that seems against the spirit of fair play imo.

but does this expose another issue as to why they dont award points to all finishers?

for all intents and purposes, in case of a tie a count back essentially does the same thing as awarding points but actually awarding points would allow for the points table to convey more information and be easier to follow for those whose interest goes deeper then just top 10 lists.

for a sport so focused on data, their willingness to present their data in an information forward way is a bit backwards to me...but then i am the kind of person who will look at the Box Scores of basketball games and glean what i can about the ebbs and flows from a game that either i couldn't watch or for action/information missed by the camera person and commentators.

also i like numbers.

so this has been a long time pet peeve of mine.

tables should convey as much relevant info as possible but on an F1 points table they make it seem like P11 down does not matter/basically not classified and since the order the drivers are listed as/ranked on (particularly the drivers with no points) is based on a count back then how is the table supposed to convey at which point in the season/at what track did a one driver with no points finish ahead of another driver with no points?

no doubt this is not a problem for most though and i may be overstating this to make my point, but without access to these numbers, comparing between eras or any sort of attempts at comparative history become problematic...as we saw in some of those wonderful tournaments 'whose the goat' threads we did a while back.

to FOM's credit though their site is starting to fill out sections for historical stats (race winners, points fastest laps) but still have a way to go in providing advanced analytics for anoraks. some other good sites out there for this stuff as well but i guess my pedantic side also requires there to be one official provider and curator of this info.

anyways, im spoiled by N.American sports where stats are everything and the respective leagues place tremendous value on maintaining these databases. for me this has been important aspect to following sports since i was a kid wasting hours pouring over the stats on the back of trading cards and pouring over the box score pages in the sports section of the newspaper.

anyways, thats my rant about nothing important for today!

[Sodemo]

Tarmac run off creates a real "grey area" - pun intentional.

The reason I believe this is because no driver really wants to be pushed wide, so if there is a corner exit situation where two cars are side by side, usually the driver on the inside will ease the driver on the outside off the track onto the tarmac / rumble strips / sausage kerbs. This is where the problem occurs because if a driver on the outside were to stand their ground, then there would almost certainly be a collision. I think drivers now are reliant on the outside driving relenting and opting to run wide and then rejoin the racetrack, however when it were gravel or grass, there was a firm delimiting line because no driver would intentionally run wide, so the driver on the outside would have to relent and give up position.

I see this a lot now, drivers forcing other drivers wide and it needs to stop.

[S griffin]

There's too many arguments around track limits, that's the problem

The thing is drivers don't respect corners as much because they know they can get away with it. Of course it doesn't help some drivers just drive another out wide, but that's another argument. Although it is a problem too the driver on the outside has that option of going wide, so the driver on the inside can just force the other wide like that. I think drivers do need to learn a bit more manners in that respect. In the past drivers would try to give room 9 times out of ten. The push for tarmac runoff has been a detriment now to me. I think we need to see less of it now. Drivers are taking too many liberties with it and I can't really blame them too much when they know they can get away with it. Have better deterrents in place and they would learn to respect corners more

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Tarmac run off creates a real "grey area" - pun intentional.

The reason I believe this is because no driver really wants to be pushed wide, so if there is a corner exit situation where two cars are side by side, usually the driver on the inside will ease the driver on the outside off the track onto the tarmac / rumble strips / sausage kerbs. This is where the problem occurs because if a driver on the outside were to stand their ground, then there would almost certainly be a collision. I think drivers now are reliant on the outside driving relenting and opting to run wide and then rejoin the racetrack, however when it were gravel or grass, there was a firm delimiting line because no driver would intentionally run wide, so the driver on the outside would have to relent and give up position.

I see this a lot now, drivers forcing other drivers wide and it needs to stop.

Absolutely agree Sodemo.

I still think that there is considerable merit for the return to the rule where a car width must be left if there is any part of a car alongside you.

I think that there should be a favourable interpretation to the passing driver when room is not left and he is forced off the track, and the pass should be allowed to stand.

They also need to be stricter when somebody avoids a contact and is disadvantaged, the place should be handed back or forced on the transgressing driver.

In my book, the rules that are enforced at historic meetings should be used as the driving standards and rules of engagement. Causing an avoidable contact should also be enforced. (Mr Ricciardo in Mexico)

[S griffin]

I think we need to tread carefully. That said, drivers should try to leave racing room. Sometimes cars can meet in the middle in corners, but that’s fine, as long as drivers don’t intentionally aim their car at the other driver.

The problem is partly the tracks having so big runoff as I say. But it does seem drivers don’t feel they should leave room anymore, which just leads to more arguments about track limits that we can do without. When a driver forces another one wide and the one on the outside gains advantage by using the wide runoff, is that really right he has to give the position back? Tbh it’s gotten too tedious.

As I said have less advantageous runoffs and make sure the drivers try to leave room for each other. That code of conduct works in other series, so why not in F1? Something needs to be done so standards don’t get too low. OTOH I feel too many racing incidents are punished. For me a simple error or misjudgment is not the same as trying force someone else to back down by aiming your car at them. And the stewards ain’t exactly consistent with their punishments. They punished Gasly for a simple mistake in Turkey at the start and let Ricciardo off for the same thing in Mexico. Personally I feel they should have let both of them go and only punish serious violations or repeat offenders

[wnut]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Just look to football for an example.

Football fans - Referees are human, they make errors, we need a better system to review judgemental errors. Surely technology can do something about it.
FIFA - Here's Video Assisted Refereeing (VAR), developed over a few years and allows replays with digitised overlays to provide obvious and clear decisions.
Football fans - VAR is rubbish. It ruins the flow of the game, decisions are made after the fact, players lose focus of the game, line calls are now based on millimetres.

Can't say I missed the doubtful line calls at the US Open tennis when the line judges were replaced with technology though.

[Anyopenroad]

Over the years I’ve read quite a few footballers point out that if they don’t fall to the ground when fouled, they don’t get the free kick or penalty that the contact warranted. I see something similar in the case of a driver pushing another wide, but not being penalised when the other backs out or takes (often detrimental) avoiding action. This is the paradox of the “causing a collision” clause. If there is no collision, there’s no foul. But that often depends on the actions of the other driver, not the one doing the naughty driving.

It would probably be good for the sport if more drivers simply held position when being forced wide and accepted the collision. Wasn’t it Senna who would push a driver off to see how they reacted? If they held firm there was a crash and Senna had learned not to try it with that driver again. If they backed out he knew they could be bullied. Maybe too many drivers are willing to be bullied.

[S griffin]

Exactly, it should be actions, not necessarily consequences that should be acted upon. How many times have we seen simple racing incidents punished with grid or time penalties, whereas dangerous swerves getting no more than a warning. Something is not right there

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Exactly, it should be actions, not necessarily consequences that should be acted upon. How many times have we seen simple racing incidents punished with grid or time penalties, whereas dangerous swerves getting no more than a warning. Something is not right there

It's called inconsistency.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It's called inconsistency.

Consistent inconsistency

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Consistent inconsistency

The best kind of inconsistency?