- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Recent reports have shown that the number of overtakes in 2011 so far is much higher than at the same three races in 2011. Finnish newspaper Turun Sanomat has found out the total is now at nearly 150 passes, but is that what Formula One really needs?
I disagree entirely. As my earlier question alluded to – who has successfully defended a DRS powered overtake. The answer is basically no one. I agree that we don't want to be in a position where a car catches and then never passes the car in front, but we similarly don't want to be in a situation where we're guaranteed that if a car catches the car in front, they will pass them in the next 2-3 laps. We appear to be in the latter situation at the moment.peteskar wrote:I also think that the DRS system is pretty good the driver still needs to out brake the other into the turn, the DRS does not simply make the car go around the other. I order to win you need to pass, I say the more overtaking the better.
Sure a driver has got to be close enough, but after that the DRS simplifies things too much, plus it is dangerous.siskue2005 wrote:Its still difficult, its not like they press the button and they magically come in front!andrew wrote: Overtaking is meant to be hard and be down to driver skill, not a mere formality due to fancy little gadgets.
first off you got to be close enough and second they got to stick the move.
What I’m saying here is the brakes are too good. Braking zones are far too short. I still remember the phrase “last of the late brakers” being used a lot and that is when there was some of the best and most memorable overtaking. Less efficient brakes would solve this problem.siskue2005 wrote:So putting drum brakes instead of carbon is proper and not gimmiky stuff, would that solve the "actual" problem ?andrew wrote: Make the cars slower (both acceleration and outright top speed), reduce braking efficiency, get proper tyres, drop KERS and the DRS and then there might be some proper racing. Pretty much go back to basics!
Schumacher did fend of Webber once that I saw in the DRS zone. On the next lap Webber went WAY inside to surprise Schumy for the pass, which looked a bit hairy because of how dirty the track was on the far inside. I swear I could almost hear Schumy curse as Webber made it past, and I'm the states! It was no easy task .. and only do-able with DRS.beelsebob wrote:I disagree entirely. As my earlier question alluded to – who has successfully defended a DRS powered overtake. The answer is basically no one. I agree that we don't want to be in a position where a car catches and then never passes the car in front, but we similarly don't want to be in a situation where we're guaranteed that if a car catches the car in front, they will pass them in the next 2-3 laps. We appear to be in the latter situation at the moment.peteskar wrote:I also think that the DRS system is pretty good the driver still needs to out brake the other into the turn, the DRS does not simply make the car go around the other. I order to win you need to pass, I say the more overtaking the better.
Brakes are just one small part, but you are correct, the aero is a big part of the problem.JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:The problem is the cars aero efficiency.
Not brakes. Reverting to brakes that require more input just suits a certain style a bit more than the others.
Take away the cars reliance on aerodynamic downforce, and you will see serious racing.
This is the real key - the drivers and cars are so closely matched that an overtake relies on a mistake from the guy in front. Most of them are too good too often to make mistakes like that. The new tyre rules effectively replace driver errors/car differences with tyre degredation differences. Being on the right tyre at the right time is the new "make no mistakes under pressure" that drivers of old had to contend with.BreezyRacer wrote: A couple of things to remember about the 80s and 90s .. the cars were far less understood than they are today. There isn't that much difference in pace between the top 14-16 cars, and all the drivers today are quite good on their own merits.
Agreed.I think that just like with the existing 3 phase qually format, this new racing is still very much racing.
DRS hailed as 'best idea ever
"There is nobody saying we are having boring races. There is overtaking left, right, and centre - everywhere. So, they have done a really, really good job and that is the most important thing that needs to be highlighted.
"The people in charge have made the sport from one year to the next so much more exciting, and that is awesome for the fans and everything. It is really cool, isn't it? It is the tyres and the rear wing.
"The rear wing – best idea ever probably, for this sport. No? And tyres also. Pirelli, everybody has been criticising them, but they have made our sport spectacular. So that is cool."
Despite Rosberg's enthusiasm for the regulation, Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali thinks it will take a bit more time to work out if the DRS is a certain success.
"We've seen three different situations in three different races, so we need to wait more to find out what is the right balance," explained the Italian. "In my view, and this is a personal view, you see the activation point of the DRS has a different effect if you are at the beginning of the race or the end of the race, depending on the tyres that you have.
"So it is a tyre effect, not related to the speed or that you are behind. It is the way the tyres behave, so we need to see what is the best solution in that respect. We saw Australia, Malaysia and China were different, but the main reason in China for overtaking was that the tyres were so different you could overtake."
As well as drivers using the DRS to overtake at the designated zone, one consequence of the straightline speed boost is that it is helping cars stay closer to each other for more of a lap - further increasing the chances of overtaking elsewhere.
So you would better have NON-visible gimmiky false racing than visible ones like KERS, DRS ?andrew wrote:What I’m saying here is the brakes are too good. Braking zones are far too short. I still remember the phrase “last of the late brakers” being used a lot and that is when there was some of the best and most memorable overtaking. Less efficient brakes would solve this problem.siskue2005 wrote:So putting drum brakes instead of carbon is proper and not gimmiky stuff, would that solve the "actual" problem ?andrew wrote: Make the cars slower (both acceleration and outright top speed), reduce braking efficiency, get proper tyres, drop KERS and the DRS and then there might be some proper racing. Pretty much go back to basics!
I want to see more race-craft having to be used by drivers. Not races won by who has a working KERS unit or whose tyres have all of a sudden turned to custard or whos DRS worked at the right time. I’m looking forward to 2013 and hope that marks the return of proper racing.
Where dos it simplifies overtaking, does it brake for them?Sure a driver has got to be close enough, but after that the DRS simplifies things too much, plus it is dangerous.
I've watched many dull races in low downforce open wheeler series over the years. And the interesting ones are usually only interesting because drivers try desperate moves that often end in contact etc.andrew wrote:Brakes are just one small part, but you are correct, the aero is a big part of the problem.JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:The problem is the cars aero efficiency.
Not brakes. Reverting to brakes that require more input just suits a certain style a bit more than the others.
Take away the cars reliance on aerodynamic downforce, and you will see serious racing.
No, I would rather have proper racing with no gimmicks whatsoever!siskue2005 wrote:So you would better have non visible gimmiky false racing than visible ones like KERS, DRS ?
putting Drum brakes instead of carbons to just increase the braking zone is gimmicky indeed!andrew wrote:No, I would rather have proper racing with no gimmicks whatsoever!siskue2005 wrote:So you would better have non visible gimmiky false racing than visible ones like KERS, DRS ?
So what you're saying is that even if you defend *really* well, it'll still only take two laps to get past under DRS? Sounds like epic fail to me.BreezyRacer wrote:Schumacher did fend of Webber once that I saw in the DRS zone. On the next lap Webber went WAY inside to surprise Schumy for the pass, which looked a bit hairy because of how dirty the track was on the far inside. I swear I could almost hear Schumy curse as Webber made it past, and I'm the states! It was no easy task .. and only do-able with DRS.beelsebob wrote:I disagree entirely. As my earlier question alluded to – who has successfully defended a DRS powered overtake. The answer is basically no one. I agree that we don't want to be in a position where a car catches and then never passes the car in front, but we similarly don't want to be in a situation where we're guaranteed that if a car catches the car in front, they will pass them in the next 2-3 laps. We appear to be in the latter situation at the moment.peteskar wrote:I also think that the DRS system is pretty good the driver still needs to out brake the other into the turn, the DRS does not simply make the car go around the other. I order to win you need to pass, I say the more overtaking the better.