2024 São Paulo Grand Prix - Interlagos, Nov 01 - 03

[marcel171281]

If you want to put in on safety, Pirelli should provide a decent alternative for the intermediates, don't blame it on these rules.

With a single tire manufacturer it makes no sense to have the intermediate be so geared for almost dry running imo.

The extremes are already in that territory where when people start putting them they call a stop to the race, might as well not exist.
Make a single tire that is more capable in dealing with water.

Agreed. Is the full wet too bad, or the intermediate too good? Anyway the step between the 2 is too big, so the full wet is pointless at this moment.

[Watto]

With Brazil I get the feeling too if the top 3 probably would have kept the old inters if there was anything like the back of theback changes there didn't seem wear issues it was either too wet or track position..

Yes, I think that was generally the plan. Not waiting for red, but somehow getting through the SC with the knowledge of the SC cycling so long that the track will be fine for the used Inter again. On the drying track the used Inter would not have been a disadvantage...maybe even an advantage as we saw it in Turkey.

But if the whole point is fairness and a level playing field that a pit under a SC/VSC can create pretty much the same disadvantage or 'luck' Either stratagey holding out hoping the a SC is called way outside a pit window where if you did pit you would be in the middle of the back. Or just a SC just a lap or two after your opponent made the call. Gaining track position. If you're about pure racing you have 'penlties' for both or neither, Plenty of races are decided by a SC

I mean...we had all these versions of it. The VSC was introduced in F1 to make it better, but only to a very limited degree.
I think the best option is how they handle it in DTM with their pit window: If the pit window is open, they keep a yellow flag for 2 laps, so that everyone can pit under yellow before the SC comes out.
This is not an option in F1 for safety reasons in my point of view.

Which gets back the the point either way there will always be winner and losers and reasons some rules won't work between different catagories someone will always be unhappy.

[venkyhere]

Which gets back the the point either way there will always be winner and losers and reasons some rules won't work between different catagories someone will always be unhappy.

+1
All those who have suddenly become FIA rules experts, race directors of the internet, where were they when the safety car picked up the wrong car and handed over 'luck' to Lando Norris in the Miami GP ? The same camp who justified 'sometimes that's how it is' are raising a hue and cry now. The other camp who cried foul in Miami GP are saying 'that's how it is' now. It's impossible to remove 'confirmation bias' from a large majority of F1 fans.

[Seanspeed]

Which gets back the the point either way there will always be winner and losers and reasons some rules won't work between different catagories someone will always be unhappy.

This reasoning could be applied to dismiss literally any calls for any kind of rule changes ever, which isn't a reasonable position. It's basically saying that the rules as they are literally at this point in time is all that anybody should ever want, and anybody who would like to see changes should just stop watching. It's a quite extreme argument.

And while in this case, certainly some people clamoring for a rule change are doing so out of some bitterness of an outcome they didn't like(while undoubtedly ignoring the same rules that benefited their preferred drivers/team in races in the past), and it's fair to point that out, it doesn't mean that we should poo poo all calls for a rule change of some sort in general.

I'd also personally argue that the sport should do more to make the 'pitting under a safety car' aspect more fair. But I'm also a stickler for fairness, even at the cost of more 'exciting' races due to track position mix ups. And I've also held this position consistently for a long while. VSC was a good improvement over just having a SC, but the pitting under the SC/VSC is still definitely an issue. I think there's a couple solutions that would improve things, even if they dont completely eliminate any level of luck. Like pitting under a VSC requires a minimum pit length time(18-22 seconds depending on track), which would immediately get lifted if the track goes green while a car is still in the pits. Teams could all work that out going into a weekend pretty easily, basically just having a predetermined stop time to ensure they make the minimum overall time. Not perfect, you could get caught out if you have your long stop and then it goes green after while you're still traveling down the distance, but I dont think discouraging teams from pitting under VSC is a terrible idea anyways.

[Watto]

Which gets back the the point either way there will always be winner and losers and reasons some rules won't work between different catagories someone will always be unhappy.

This reasoning could be applied to dismiss literally any calls for any kind of rule changes ever, which isn't a reasonable position. It's basically saying that the rules as they are literally at this point in time is all that anybody should ever want, and anybody who would like to see changes should just stop watching. It's a quite extreme argument.

And while in this case, certainly some people clamoring for a rule change are doing so out of some bitterness of an outcome they didn't like(while undoubtedly ignoring the same rules that benefited their preferred drivers/team in races in the past), and it's fair to point that out, it doesn't mean that we should poo poo all calls for a rule change of some sort in general.

I'd also personally argue that the sport should do more to make the 'pitting under a safety car' aspect more fair. But I'm also a stickler for fairness, even at the cost of more 'exciting' races due to track position mix ups. And I've also held this position consistently for a long while. VSC was a good improvement over just having a SC, but the pitting under the SC/VSC is still definitely an issue. I think there's a couple solutions that would improve things, even if they dont completely eliminate any level of luck. Like pitting under a VSC requires a minimum pit length time(18-22 seconds depending on track), which would immediately get lifted if the track goes green while a car is still in the pits. Teams could all work that out going into a weekend pretty easily, basically just having a predetermined stop time to ensure they make the minimum overall time. Not perfect, you could get caught out if you have your long stop and then it goes green after while you're still traveling down the distance, but I dont think discouraging teams from pitting under VSC is a terrible idea anyways.

I am okay with rule changes as long as they are well thought out and not just a knee jerk reacton.

Which is why I bought up the pitting under a SC/VSC up the dicussion is around red flags but i see these are very simular issues if your point it to maintain fairness and leads you may have worked up. Both are used routinely by teams to change race outcomes often luck is involved. Either gaining track position or a big tyre offset.

Something like delta time for VSC and another for a SC could work or the race director could have come mechanism to change places around while they are following the SC the same kinda as lapped cars can unlap themselves and get on the back of the pack again.So someone that may have pitted before the SC isn't of a disadvantage and track positions could be maintained as if the race was run under green conditions . It still has drawbacks sure with the field bunched together if you have a big tyre offset do you maintain track positon and risk someone behind with fresh tyres and a bunched up field.

[dialtone]

Can whoever is in support/knows for the current setup in red flag where you can change tires and fix the car without penalty explain why that is?

[Watto]

Can whoever is in support/knows for the current setup in red flag where you can change tires and fix the car without penalty explain why that is?

The official reason was always I believe the risk of debris on the track that may puncture tyres and its a safety risk. If you choose keep the tyres to maintain your position go racing find a slow puncture and into a wall you go. What happens if some cars went through the debris and other didn't so make it a level playing field they allowed everyone to change tyres etc.

[Farnborough]

VSC implementation was in response to the tragic, and frankly awfull series of events immediately prior to Jules Bianchi accident.

It's very serious in it's introduction, which I fully agree with in using.

I'll take a variable "result" in position, points or championship, if it aids in avoiding that outcome. Fairness doesn't come into it for me in sporting terms. Thats absolutely secondary to their safety, drivers and track workers all.

I've seen enough of those type chain of events accident in F1, Moto-GP and other race series to be able to prioritise that. It should be used intelligently SC VSC Red flag etc to lead that safety risk aspect.

[Mandrake]

Why did Russel and Norris put on Inters if the track was becoming too wet for inters? They should have put on full wets on the stop. Had the race not been red flagged then all the drivers on full wets would have driven to the front. According to the "red flag should not allow changes to the car" logic they should also be compensated for having their advantage robbed by the red flag. Tsunoda would have passed both Norris and Russel had it not been for the SC and Red Flag. He was taking away 5s in the first sector alone.

[dialtone]

Why did Russel and Norris put on Inters if the track was becoming too wet for inters? They should have put on full wets on the stop. Had the race not been red flagged then all the drivers on full wets would have driven to the front. According to the "red flag should not allow changes to the car" logic they should also be compensated for having their advantage robbed by the red flag. Tsunoda would have passed both Norris and Russel had it not been for the SC and Red Flag. He was taking away 5s in the first sector alone.

I agree, that's how the race should have gone, people that put on full wets (notably not ferrari before I'm accused of wanting to advantage my team with rule changes) have been robbed of an advantage they gained by putting on the right tire for the weather.

The "according" part of your reasoning though I can't understand though.

EDIT: I will say that I consider the full wet cars to be "robbed" because the danger of the race was practically induced by the intermediate tire not being enough and teams being willing to gamble when perhaps their drivers didn't have the skill to do so (see colapinto crashing on SC with new inters on).

[Watto]

VSC implementation was in response to the tragic, and frankly awfull series of events immediately prior to Jules Bianchi accident.

It's very serious in it's introduction, which I fully agree with in using.

I'll take a variable "result" in position, points or championship, if it aids in avoiding that outcome. Fairness doesn't come into it for me in sporting terms. Thats absolutely secondary to their safety, drivers and track workers all.

I've seen enough of those type chain of events accident in F1, Moto-GP and other race series to be able to prioritise that. It should be used intelligently SC VSC Red flag etc to lead that safety risk aspect.

I tend to agree with all of that too. I think the VSC is a great idea allows gaps to be kept for minor incidents.

I also think this was a case too where the red flags had to be called enough drivers were having trouble even going slow, with debris on the track and a very wet track and marshals it had to be called (ref to Lando not thinging it deserved a red flag)

I lean towards them keeping the race going and not calling the red too upto that point because as some have pointed out too often that leads to the end of the race track gets wetter and almost impossible to drive on.

[basti313]

This reasoning could be applied to dismiss literally any calls for any kind of rule changes ever, ........... is a terrible idea anyways.

No, only terrible ideas.

or the race director

Who of you trusts the race director? Interesting statement after all the overtaking discussions, delayed flags, delayed SC...now you want the race director to set the order?

This is a bit like the virtual referee in soccer...people call for change with only terrible ideas.

Both are used routinely by teams to change race outcomes often luck is involved.

??? You are speaking about red flags??? "Routinely"???
We had three potentially race changing red flags in the last years, where only one of them (Silverstone) had a really strong influence on the outcome. The two other flags (Saudi and Braz) are unclear how they would have affected it, maybe not at all or only in the midfield.
Before that we had barely race changing red flags. Do you remember any?

Can whoever is in support/knows for the current setup in red flag where you can change tires and fix the car without penalty explain why that is?

Two reasons: Many drivers would have been out or in last place without this rule to be able to repair under red. Example Hamilton in Silverstone, Verstappen in Hungary. We do not want to see people just out. This is also the simple reasoning behind the debris argument.
Second reason is that they simply could not restart under changing conditions in the past without the rule that tires can be changed.

In the end Liberty wants cars on the grid and high safety.

[Farnborough]

Looking at it from a probability angle, this completely mad red flag control as it exists (promoted by some as that, not me) would in all reasonable projection throw up a very odd winner.

In reality, everyone, on here, in the teams etc, knew the weather predictions for the entire weekend (it was very accurate) then were you to workout your own team probability of succeeding, having one of the best equipped of drivers, decent car and setup, good and very practiced strategy decision/action deployment ....

And the answer comes out as Verstappen or Hamilton ..... over many of the recent season it proves those qualities from having them in a stack of your own favour to generate significant success in these highly variable traction type races.

It really does prove that those two .... you can also substitute Schumacher, Senna etc in those era too. It proves that those type drivers are particularly equipped to take on this scenario, and outperform most others in the field. Whichever way the rules may he "flipped, diced" or otherwise, those drivers in even a half decent car do come to the front.

This race, like Russia did, showcase that mix of driver qualities.

Lewis's car was a shocker here though. Whatever had happened to that setup ?

Anyone watched MV into corner #4 when overtaking Alonso ? An object lesson in car handling when viewed from overhead, almost baletic in it's gentle rotation of back out going into apex in turning the car, many will never come close to that level.
I don't really care which driver it is, but have watched this sport for long enough to recognise there's few reaching that level of skill at extremis in car dynamics.
People have their favourite driver, but that display is undeniable.

[Watto]

or the race director

Who of you trusts the race director? Interesting statement after all the overtaking discussions, delayed flags, delayed SC...now you want the race director to set the order?

This is a bit like the virtual referee in soccer...people call for change with only terrible ideas.

Both are used routinely by teams to change race outcomes often luck is involved.

??? You are speaking about red flags??? "Routinely"???
We had three potentially race changing red flags in the last years, where only one of them (Silverstone) had a really strong influence on the outcome. The two other flags (Saudi and Braz) are unclear how they would have affected it, maybe not at all or only in the midfield.
Before that we had barely race changing red flags. Do you remember any?

I don't really trust the race director no. Seen too much where the decisions feel too commercial rather than fair for everyone

As for routinely I was refering to yellow/SC/VSC calls. I doubt there are many races around where teams don't plan around a SC and what they may do running long etc not all teams but as a risk reward if they were unlikly to win the race without it. Doesn't always pay off just that teams do it. Again if peoples arguments are that the red flag tyre changes are bad because a driver built a lead only for it to come undone by somthing outside their control that probably wouldn't have happened without the SC and some 'luck' both fall to me under the same basic issue, you can't complan about the fairness of a red flag and dismiss the the a SC/VSC can alter races in the exact same way. I would almost argue too the red flag may even be fairer.

If you were the main beneficiary of an incident where a SC is called and pit because of it where perhaps your opponent who pitted maybe 10-15 laps earlier is stuck between do we pit and give up more track position or say out and hope we can get a big enough gap where the tyre offset come back to bite. Maintain the same position as you were both with fresh tyres and a level playing field from then on in

[Cs98]

Which gets back the the point either way there will always be winner and losers and reasons some rules won't work between different catagories someone will always be unhappy.

This reasoning could be applied to dismiss literally any calls for any kind of rule changes ever, which isn't a reasonable position. It's basically saying that the rules as they are literally at this point in time is all that anybody should ever want, and anybody who would like to see changes should just stop watching. It's a quite extreme argument.

That reasoning is perfectly valid when people are calling for changes but not providing any real improved solutions. They're just knee-jerk reacting because this time their favoured team/driver got the short end of the stick, without putting much further thought into it. If you change the rules to make it so that you can't swap tyres under a red flag, or it doesn't count towards your mandatory stop, suddenly the other half of the field (who haven't pitted yet) will be screwed. You haven't solved anything, you're just swapping around the losers. I think the way we have it now is safer (because you can always go out on a new tyre that is right for the conditions), and fairer. Even if you lose a few positions during a red flag you still come out with new tyres fighting for positions with the cars around you, everyone is in phase and it's easy to understand for viewers. If you were forced to go back out on old tyres or it didn't count towards your mandatory stop (most races are one stops), that's pretty much race over for that guy and it becomes a nightmare for casual viewers to understand who is battling who. Keep it simple, keep it safe, it all evens out in the long run.