Overtaking in F1 and what it should not be

[BreezyRacer]

An interesting article here on F1Tech by Steven De Groote

http://www.f1technical.net/news/16215

It seems to end with the conclusion ..
"In the end, Formula One as it is now, with KERS and Pirelli tyres could easily do without a drag reduction system, which is a very artificial system in its currently regulated form."

For my money this season is SO much more interesting to watch than past seasons where the race was simply a playing out of well established strategies that I hate to monkey with it too much. However here I go ..

CHANGE THESE DAMN STUPID TIRES!!!!!!!!!!! They just fall off ridiculously. For my money I would prefer to see the tires a little closer together in performance and would definitely prefer they do not destroy themselves on only a handful of laps. I would still like to see about 2-3 pit stops but I would like to see more gradual degradation. Also I would NOT like to be in the Pirelli marketing dept right now .. this cannot be helpful for them to sell tires.

All hail to the use of KERS and DRS. Now a faster driver/car can actually make it through a field of slower cars so that, in the case of Webber a start from the back can still post a good finish if the plan is right. Just think about that .. this implies that probably anyone in the top ten at the start has a fair/square chance to go for the win. That's worth watching every lap, as opposed to watching the start and the last few laps.

[volarchico]

Webber didn't make all his moves based on KERS and DRS considering his KERS was broken. He was able to gain back all those positions based on having a fast car, and having even faster tires than everyone else (3 sets of new softs). Over-discussed in the "tires" thread already as well as the race threads themselves.

[bhall]

I think the article by our gracious host is spot on. Had the powers-that-be known that a simple change (relatively speaking, of course) in tire construction would have such a massive impact on racing, they would have never gone for DRS in the first place.

In light of everything, I sincerely hope DRS is quickly shelved. If raw speed, superior tire management or a cunning strategy don't allow for a driver to overtake the car in front of him, he doesn't deserve the higher place simply because a gimmick does.

[PlatinumZealot]

The DRS is working wonderfully, we are getting close races from start to finish and it's not because of tyres because if were only for the tyres, using the same strategies would still produce that field stretch that we've been seeing for years.

- All these DRS naysayers are just looking for attention.

[bhall]

I saw plenty of overtaking maneuvers in China, including the one for the win, which had nothing to do with DRS.

DRS inherently puts drivers on unequal footing, something which in any other context would be vehemently protested by teams up and down the paddock.

[Giblet]

Random idea:

The use of the DRS should cost you one WDC point for each use in overtaking. Anyone outside the points can use free of charge, until they get into the points.

Make it have a cost as well as a bonus. Could make for some interesting situations.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Random idea:

The use of the DRS should cost you one WDC point for each use in overtaking. Anyone outside the points can use free of charge, until they get into the points.

Make it have a cost as well as a bonus. Could make for some interesting situations.

Christ that will keep the officials busy!

[beelsebob]

I saw plenty of overtaking maneuvers in China, including the one for the win, which had nothing to do with DRS.

DRS inherently puts drivers on unequal footing, something which in any other context would be vehemently protested by teams up and down the paddock.

No, having drivers following in the wake of a car that's pushing enormous amounts of air both up and outwards puts the drivers on an inherently unequal footing, DRS attempts to equal the footing.

[beelsebob]

CHANGE THESE DAMN STUPID TIRES!!!!!!!!!!! They just fall off ridiculously. For my money I would prefer to see the tires a little closer together in performance and would definitely prefer they do not destroy themselves on only a handful of laps. I would still like to see about 2-3 pit stops but I would like to see more gradual degradation. Also I would NOT like to be in the Pirelli marketing dept right now .. this cannot be helpful for them to sell tires.

I don't understand how you expect this to work. Either they degrade in 15-20 laps and we get 2/3 stop races (as now), or the degrade more gradually (say, over 20-30 laps) and we get fewer pit stops. You can't have tyres that degrade slowly, but keep the put stop count up.

[Giblet]

Random idea:

The use of the DRS should cost you one WDC point for each use in overtaking. Anyone outside the points can use free of charge, until they get into the points.

Make it have a cost as well as a bonus. Could make for some interesting situations.

Christ that will keep the officials busy!

The more I think about though, the less fanciful it seems to me. GPS and the ECU combined with race control could run this system the same way the current one works.

All your adding is the metric of position, and a tally for each button press of DRS while the position is greater than 10. The number of presses could be shown on the on screen graphic and live timing screen.

I see this as something that could lessen the use of DRS while adding meaning to using it.

[bhall]

No, having drivers following in the wake of a car that's pushing enormous amounts of air both up and outwards puts the drivers on an inherently unequal footing, DRS attempts to equal the footing.

I don't understand that logic. Save for somehow suspending the rules of physics, cars will always produce a wake. Always.

But...not all cars have access to DRS.

I keep envisioning a scenario whereby a team/driver is only able to manage 99% of the performance of another team/driver, yet is able to beat them/him because of a gimmick in the rules.

What's to stop a driver from riding out an entire race behind a car he wouldn't ordinarily be able to pass only to use DRS on the last lap and win the race? Is it fair to require teams/drivers to have to be a full second better than everyone around them to guarantee their just rewards?

Considering that millions of dollars are spent chasing gains of a tenth of a second here and a tenth of a second there, it boggles my mind that a team could everything just a little bit better than everyone else, yet somehow lose because a trailing car is allowed to do something the leader is not.

[beelsebob]

No, having drivers following in the wake of a car that's pushing enormous amounts of air both up and outwards puts the drivers on an inherently unequal footing, DRS attempts to equal the footing.

I don't understand that logic. Save for somehow suspending the rules of physics, cars will always produce a wake. Always.

Indeed they will – and this wake will always (as you point out) put the following car at a disadvantage (possibly a severe one if the wake is strong as it is on F1 cars).

But...not all cars have access to DRS.

Indeed, because not all cars are following in another one's wake – exactly the cars in another car's wake have access to DRS to offset it's effect.

I keep envisioning a scenario whereby a team/driver is only able to manage 99% of the performance of another team/driver, yet is able to beat them/him because of a gimmick in the rules.

If the driver can only manage 99% of the performance of another, then clearly he would never be able to keep up with that driver in his wake.

What's to stop a driver from riding out an entire race behind a car he wouldn't ordinarily be able to pass only to put DRS to use on the last lap and win the race? Is it fair require teams/drivers to have to be a full second better than everyone around them to guarantee just rewards?

You're claiming that DRS gains you a second per lap? That sounds pretty extreme. And I think the past 3 races have shown that passing is still sufficiently difficult that no driver could confidently use the strategy you're talking about. Hamilton is even quoted after china as saying that he thought he stood no chance of passing vettel if it came down to a last lap DRS battle, hence why he passed him in a rather "unique" place (using KERS to boost past in turn 7 is ballsy as hell).

[bhall]

I edited my other post to add a few thoughts.

I still don't understand the notion that DRS compensates for a leading car's production of wake.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

The point is EVERYONE can use DRS. If it favours the guy behind and he overtakes, he then becomes IT, the guy behind then has the DRS ability.

What this overcomes spectacularly is the "Trulli train". It works a treat even if some purists believe in there being 5 overtakes in a race, and deeming them worth simply because of less frequency.
Well im in the DRS boat, and while some overtakes are easier, not all were gimmes.

Who can deny that racing has improved?

For that DRS has earned its place.

[bhall]

No, that's just it, not everyone can use DRS.

The race leader can NEVER use DRS. But, the guy behind him can.

A driver can sit in 2nd place all day long and then spring DRS on the last lap and win. How is that fair?