2015 Belgian Grand Prix - 21-23 August

[Silent Storm]

I want genuine overtaking and closely fought battles.

Them you need to stop watching F1, as that is never going to happen. Formula racing rules don't produce close racing, one design does.

Agree. If you want close racing watch Moto3 which has many overtakes.

[i70q7m7ghw]

If you ban refuelling and put the cars all on the same tyres it's no wonder there's less variation, you've taken away most of the variables!

1- Driver
2- PU (including mgu-k, mgu-h, TC, electronics and ICE)
3- Chasis (including suspensions, etc.)
4- Aero

Do you really need more variables?

There are many series where there´s only one variable (driver), maybe two if you want to include setup dialing, and they usually are the most fun series instead of a procesion like we see in F1 too frequently. Problem is not the number of variables, problem is the pace difference needed to overtake (read, aero). That´s what should be solved, not increasing the number of variables with gimmicks like DRS, crappy tyres, etc.

Perhaps, but F1 is not a spec series, it's meant to be a constructors championship as well as a drivers championship, and it is something I enjoy seeing.

I think most agree now that F1 has taken the wrong direction in more than a few areas, hopefully the rule shake up in 2017 will get it back on course. I would very much like to see the return of multiple tyre suppliers, I think it's just healthier for the sport.

[PlatinumZealot]

The question of bringing back refueling has been looked at by all the interested parties (FIA, FOCA, GPDA) and dropped. Statisticaly, there was LESS overtaking during the refueling era (http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... refuelling). Therefore, adding this variable with have the opposite effect and make things worse.

I guess the FIA has not seen my fuel pod idea... yet! With my fuel pod idea refueling takes less time than changing the tyres. Therfore there is no extra advantage to overtaking in the pits any more than what they get from it now.

My dossier with complete process decriptions and drawing will be at the fia's door any time now.

[Phil]

If you ban refuelling and put the cars all on the same tyres it's no wonder there's less variation, you've taken away most of the variables! Creating fragile unpredictable tyres is not the answer. The answer is to allow more tyre manufacturers back in to the sport, and maybe allow more freedom of choice with regards to tyre selection. But for gods sake, make the tyres more durable!

No, really, no. We don't want more tire manufacturers. We really don't. If we do, then you are simply exaggerating the effect these engines already have - namely the utter dominance thanks to a single entity that is outside most teams control. And the tire is a huge factor.

Lets say you have 3 tire manufacturers that any team is open to use - then they'll all just use them all during testing to determine which is the best and use that for qualifying and race. Result: no variation. Also; bad for the tire manufacturers, as those who did a worse job will get bad publicity for under delivering.

If you bind tire manufacturers to teams, like we had in the past when we had Bridgestones and Michelin, you aren't much better, as those on the worse tires will simply not be able to compete. At all. It will be like we have now with the engines; Those with a weak PU have an additional handicap. With this, you aren't bringing the field closer together, you are potentially making it even worse with factors outside of the teams control.

No thanks.

What you may be thinking of, is handicapping the stronger teams with worse tires, but it won't work and it wouldn't be fair either.

[Phil]

Because the sport has chosen to move away from refueling. If we simply stay with tires that remain more or less consistent over the duration of an entire race, without the likes of refueling, we have the problem that the car qualifying on pole (potentially the quickest car), will simply drive off into the distance. The race as a result will simply be a progression, a logical conclusion where the order of qualifying will also dictate the order of the finish. The quickest cars start in front and simply drive on.

The question of bringing back refueling has been looked at by all the interested parties (FIA, FOCA, GPDA) and dropped. Statisticaly, there was LESS overtaking during the refueling era (http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... refuelling). Therefore, adding this variable with have the opposite effect and make things worse.

I never said the refueling era had more overtakes, but you are overlooking the impact of DRS if you are simply comparing then with now. Refueling posed a natural way of enhancing overtakes; You would have those qualifying in front (the stronger teams) who would generally favor the quickest strategy - e.g. short but quick, where as teams in the midfield might gamble by going long but slower by running heavier. This would naturally put cars on differing strategies closer together, for example if a car doing multiple short stints behind cars on longer but fewer stints. This creates overtake opportunities.

The only way to do this without refueling, having heavy cars, is by introducing variable "short-life" tires like we have now, where some teams might opt for OOP vs. a team doing an alternative strategy like PO. Will it guarantee that the cars doing more stops will get into traffic against teams on an alternative strategy? No. That entirely depends on the speed differential between those teams - so in that sense, nothing has changed from the refueling era. Lets not mistake one for the other.

If you stay with starting on full tanks and introduce long lasting tires, you will reduce overtakes and opportunities because the cars starting in front of the grid (because they are the fastest) will then simply drive off. It will be a boring progression.

I want genuine overtaking and closely fought battles.

Define genuine overtaking.

Is pitting one car on fresher tires vs. car on worn tires not genuine if it was the strategic choice of both drivers that got them into that battle in the first place? I.e. Vettel / Grosjean - they only ended up on the same stretch of road precisely because Ferrari decided to go long and risky. Had they done the same like Grosjean, they wouldn't have fought for that position in the first place. Same applies to Hungary with Ricciardo coming through the field with fresh option tires vs most of the field ahead who was on primes. RedBull went risky, it paid off. I think this is just as genuine as any other overtake.

However if you mean "genuine" as in - same car, same tire [state], same fuel load? It's rarely possible unless a car is out of position (penality, drive-through, messed up start etc). You are not going to get that, unless you start with reverse-grid-order or something, but how "genuine" is that if you are forcing the quicker cars to start from behind? If you really want that - go watch a spec series or something.

[ChrisF1]

Genuine overtaking can come from matched cars - it's from forcing an error, pushing the other driver to the limit.

At the moment the guys are driving to target lap times, sitting a second away from each other and putting no pressure on anybody because the tyres and aero prevent them from getting that close.

[Just_a_fan]

If you want to force drivers to overtake then you provide a long life tyre and ban pit stops other than for punctures. Drivers then have to overtake.

Of course, the cars need to allow close running for that to work...

[iotar__]

Genuine overtaking can come from matched cars - it's from forcing an error, pushing the other driver to the limit.
At the moment the guys are driving to target lap times, sitting a second away from each other and putting no pressure on anybody because the tyres and aero prevent them from getting that close.

Did you miss Grosjean on Bottas and all the others if you think about it? What "genuine overtakes", what "target laps", when "re-fuelling makes overtakes possible"? I apologise but I will leave it at that and for something different:

Merc starts in Amus https://translate.google.com/translate? ... 40865.html
- they claim Rosberg had similar warmer clutch situation as Hamilton in Hungary so if you said it wasn't his fault then you can't blame Rosberg now, I think in both cases drivers were involved, Rosberg maybe less because of lack of information?
- translation is not perfect but the gist of it is they have narrow operating window and need to adjust
- they are planning different clutch for Singapore

Weird explanation, not for technical reasons obviously but because of the way the were selling it until now. Narrow operating window is surely not an unknown to them and not "multiple different elements" they needed to investigate which is what Wolff claimed. Not to mention long-winded delayed explanation blaming the engine in Austria.

I think it matches not a theory but a vague impression that they may have equalised starts (sometimes down) after realising it can have a big affect. It didn't exactly work - bad starts from both so they are now making changes. "In Spa and Monza we can live with bad starts, because you can overtake there." Sounds like Mercedes' logic: if we can get away with it. If we have results we want (GB) it's fine, if not (Austria, Hungary until late laps) it's a problem.

[ChrisF1]

Genuine overtaking can come from matched cars - it's from forcing an error, pushing the other driver to the limit.
At the moment the guys are driving to target lap times, sitting a second away from each other and putting no pressure on anybody because the tyres and aero prevent them from getting that close.

Did you miss Grosjean on Bottas and all the others if you think about it? What "genuine overtakes", what "target laps", when "re-fuelling makes overtakes possible"? I apologise but I will leave it at that and for something different:

The lower the field, the more that the drivers are willing to do this. The higher up the field, they just won't go for a pass - it's just scalextric.

Rosberg didn't overtake Hamilton at all in 2014, but they spent lap after lap just seconds apart.

All through 2015 there have been calls from Lewis, Nico and Seb saying to the engineers "I can't stay close enough, can't overtake on track, you'll have to come up with another plan" - we've even heard it in practice where the comments are "overtaking will be impossible"

These guys are racers, and Lewis is one of the best overtakers in Formula 1.

[Phil]

If you want to force drivers to overtake then you provide a long life tyre and ban pit stops other than for punctures. Drivers then have to overtake.

Of course, the cars need to allow close running for that to work...

Good luck with that when the fastest car starts on pole, the 2nd fastest on 2nd, the 3rd fastest on 3rd and so on. I pretty much guarantee you, that's the best way to have ZERO overtakes.

I will to a certainty of 99.999% be able to predict that outside technical errors or drivers starting off position, the race will end in the exact same order they started in. I'm pretty sure that's a 1st class ticket on how to kill the sport back to its niche ages. Assuming we are still talking about F1 as in a team-sport, where cars are not spec and we have naturally quicker cars and slower ones.

Now, if you change the qualifying / starting-order mode... then we might be on to something. I can't see this being any less gimmicky than bringing in half exploding tires...

[Andres125sx]

Phil, if that´d be true, then there would be zero overtakes in any spec series, and that´s far from reality. Some cars perform better in Q than race, same for drivers. Then there´s driver mistakes both in race and Q, and that´s more than enough to guarantee a lot of overtakes. In F1 it would be even better as it´s not a spec series and differences between teams are bigger.

What you say would be true if applied to F1 as it is today, when cars with similar pace can´t fight each other. That´s the route FIA took, instead of solving the aero problem they tried to compensate with gimmicks like tyres wich can´t be pushed hard or unfair advantages like DRS.

What I´d love to see is solving the real problem instead of trying to compensate it with gimmicks. I don´t want F1 to become a spec series, manufacturers battles are a nice part of F1, but if speed differential between cars to allow overtakes would be smaller, then it would be possible to have it all, drivers battles, manufacturers battles, and overtakes. Problem comes when speed differential needed to overtake is so high, and that´s a problem created by current aero rules, not due to cars performing too similar. In any spec series perfomance between teams is much closer and they still have great battles, there´s no reason to think in F1, with higher perfomance differences, there would be no overtakes.

Problem is speed differential needed to overtake, not speed differential itself. For example, in FE speed differential between teams in lower than half a second, and they can overtake. In F1 speed differential is higher than a full second, and they can´t overtake. That´s the problem to solve, not trying to increase even more speed differential between cars

[Phil]

Phil, if that´d be true, then there would be zero overtakes in any spec series, and that´s far from reality. Some cars perform better in Q than race, same for drivers. Then there´s driver mistakes both in race and Q, and that´s more than enough to guarantee a lot of overtakes. In F1 it would be even better as it´s not a spec series and differences between teams are bigger.

Eh, no. To have genuine overtakes on track, first you need to get two cars in close approximation of one another. If the quicker car is already ahead of the slower one because of qualifying, that gap is not going to decrease, it's going to increase. And that is exactly what will happen if you have more durable tires. There will be no reason for "quicker cars" to get into traffic of slower ones.

Spec series is an entirely different topic; In most spec series, the cars are identical in every way (usually except setup) and because the cars are overall closer in performance enhances the risk that individual driving errors or smaller set-up changes, variation in tire deg or pressure will lead to a battle on track. Also because the cars are identical, the element of slip-streaming has a much greater effect.

Lets stop this talk right here. F1 is not a spec series and will never be, so the challenge to enhance the spectacle through overtakes is very different.

[Mandrake]

I want genuine overtaking and closely fought battles.

Them you need to stop watching F1, as that is never going to happen. Formula racing rules don't produce close racing, one design does.

Agree. If you want close racing watch Moto3 which has many overtakes.

Totally offtopic here:
Going to the WEC at the Nürburgring this Sunday. Big expectations for racing action and sound Hope I'll enjoy

[Andres125sx]

Eh, no. To have genuine overtakes on track, first you need to get two cars in close approximation of one another. If the quicker car is already ahead of the slower one because of qualifying, that gap is not going to decrease, it's going to increase. And that is exactly what will happen if you have more durable tires. There will be no reason for "quicker cars" to get into traffic of slower ones.

IMHO that´s over-simplifying (if that word exist) racing Phil. Most racing series uses tyres that last the whole race, almost all of them, and they provide a lot more excitement than F1, no matter if spec series or not. Racing is not that easy, there are tons of variables wich make that logical prediction useless, from driver mistakes to track or weather changes.

Spec series is an entirely different topic; In most spec series, the cars are identical in every way (usually except setup) and because the cars are overall closer in performance enhances the risk that individual driving errors or smaller set-up changes, variation in tire deg or pressure will lead to a battle on track. Also because the cars are identical, the element of slip-streaming has a much greater effect.

True, but also slip-streaming has a much greater effect because in most series cars can start the straight just behind the car in front, what means they start the straigh already into the slip-stream, while in f1 they must stay at some distance so they start the straight out of the slip-stream, or too far to take advantage of it.

That´s the reason for DRS, trying to compensate this. Instead of solving the problem (aero wich don´t allow close chasing), they´re trying to compensate the problem with a patch.

Lets stop this talk right here. F1 is not a spec series and will never be, so the challenge to enhance the spectacle through overtakes is very different.

I´ve never claimed F1 should be a spec series, actually I specifically said I don´t want that to happen. And yes, the challenge to enhace the spectacle is very different, they must implement some aero restrictions to allow real battles, something no other series need to implement. And please don´t confuse restrictions with "make F1 a spec series". There are restrictions in every simgle component of a F1 car, from wheels size, width and number to cylinders size, dimensions and number, and nobody said F1 is a spec series for this, so some more in aero department to improve the show wouldn´t be crazy at all.


Anycase agree about the let´s stop this talk right here, this is not the thread to discuss about this problems.

[i70q7m7ghw]

If you ban refuelling and put the cars all on the same tyres it's no wonder there's less variation, you've taken away most of the variables! Creating fragile unpredictable tyres is not the answer. The answer is to allow more tyre manufacturers back in to the sport, and maybe allow more freedom of choice with regards to tyre selection. But for gods sake, make the tyres more durable!

No, really, no. We don't want more tire manufacturers. We really don't. If we do, then you are simply exaggerating the effect these engines already have - namely the utter dominance thanks to a single entity that is outside most teams control. And the tire is a huge factor.

Lets say you have 3 tire manufacturers that any team is open to use - then they'll all just use them all during testing to determine which is the best and use that for qualifying and race. Result: no variation. Also; bad for the tire manufacturers, as those who did a worse job will get bad publicity for under delivering.

If you bind tire manufacturers to teams, like we had in the past when we had Bridgestones and Michelin, you aren't much better, as those on the worse tires will simply not be able to compete. At all. It will be like we have now with the engines; Those with a weak PU have an additional handicap. With this, you aren't bringing the field closer together, you are potentially making it even worse with factors outside of the teams control.

No thanks.

What you may be thinking of, is handicapping the stronger teams with worse tires, but it won't work and it wouldn't be fair either.

No not at all, the engines are totally different. The big problem with the engines right now is they can't develop them. So teams like McLaren are stuck in a hole and they aren't being allowed to climb out. If they brought back multiple tyre manufacturers those tyre manufacturers would be allowed to develop the tyres to keep up with the competition, and the point is it would be a competition, who is competing with Pirelli right now?

Ferrari weren't dominant in the early 2000s solely because of Bridgestone, they had the best car & driver, the only other Bridgestone runners in those years were back markers!

Development freezing is what is killing the sport. It only made sense to freeze the V8 engines because they had all been developed to a point where they were mostly equal. It doesn't make sense to freeze any aspect of the sport where there is a big difference in performance. Engine development needs to be opened right up, just set a limit of the price of customer engines so the manufacturers don't cripple the independent teams with the development costs.

The same is true of the tyres, Pirelli aren't developing the tyres other than when they have to make changes for safety. Again, when Bridgestone were the only supplier they were running tyres that had been developed over many many seasons. Pirelli either need a kick up the ass to develop better tyres, or they need some competition to force them to do it. If Michelin returned to the sport I have no doubt they would make Pirelli look very silly indeed.