Formula 1 2013: General Discussion Thread

Frank Bullitt

Bit of a backlash for the double points, and rightfully so. I can see it being scrapped.

Cookie_Monster

Jordan 191 wrote: »

I don't agree with that. There should be no double points awarded at any race.

neither do I, but better than just the last race since they're being silly about it

recyclebin

DRS already creates artificial overtaking giving the guy in front a huge disadvantage. Why do they feel the need for another stupid rule? Double points is just another stupid gimmick dumbing down Formula 1.

GarIT

recyclebin wrote: »

DRS already creates artificial overtaking giving the guy in front a huge disadvantage. Why do they feel the need for another stupid rule? Double points is just another stupid gimmick dumbing down Formula 1.

Most people argue that we shouldn't have DRS at all. I think the opposite and that all teams should have DRS on all straights, obviously it needs to be turned off on corners for safety reasons. I'm more liberal with rules and think if it can be done it should be allowed, except for things being controlled by computer.

PopePalpatine

I'm in favour of what I like to call Downforce Enhancement System, where downforce is increased in corners to allow for more overtakes.

counterlock

Here's a class, brief season review by espn

http://review.espn.co.uk//formula1/

PS; skip the Legard video at the start

Frank Bullitt

Myrddin wrote: »

Can't see re-fueling ever coming back, not when the cars are packed with KERS/ERS systems...& they're not going anywhere

Well they did have refuelling in 2009, but I agree that it won't be back anytime soon.

vectra

Deleted User wrote: »

If you're on pole it means you have a fast car and you're already in the best position to win the race. The last thing you need is to give the pole sitter more of an advantage by giving him more points.

How many non winning poles were had this season?
And last season?

ZiabR

Myrddin wrote: »

Yeah safety grounds really. I know the cars get grounded in the pits but with so much stored electrical energy in the batteries, it could be disastrous in the event of a fuel spillage. More so than ever now with what ERS will be expected to do

Completely agree with this. I don't think we will ever see refueling in F1 again. Pit crew have been burned, drivers burned and as Myrddin says, with all of the complex electrics like KERS etc, the safety risk would be too high.

vectra

vectra wrote: »

How many non winning poles were had this season?
And last season?

Who got the most poles in 2013? Yeah, the guy who won the championship. He got 9 poles and the guy who came 2nd in the drivers championship got 0 poles.

So if you're giving points for pole, the points gap between Vettel and the rest would be even more ridiculous. He got 15 poles in 2011 for pete's sake.

You already get a reward for qualifying; the starting positions.

Just watching the Chinese Grand Prix from this year, did Webber ever get a penalty for the wheel coming off? He got away with some stupid stuff despite all his whinging.

As for the rules, can only guess they were expecting some other backlash and that the double-points is just bait as distraction.

When it comes to a general point about the rules and too many, I agree to some extent. I don't mind the fuel limit in principle but 100kg sounds awfully low. The main thing though is that with a fuel limit and turbos there's really no need for stupid DRS. Then again they're limiting the turbos so much next year so who knows?

Donnelly117

Deleted User wrote: »

Just watching the Chinese Grand Prix from this year, did Webber ever get a penalty for the wheel coming off? He got away with some stupid stuff despite all his whinging.

Red Bull were fined weren't they? What is the point in punishing Webber himself? He's not responsible for the pit crew's **** ups...
Team mistakes should be team fines and driver errors should be driver (grid) penalties, fines etc

Donnelly117

Donnelly117 wrote: »

Red Bull were fined weren't they? What is the point in punishing Webber himself? He's not responsible for the pit crew's **** ups...
Team mistakes should be team fines and driver errors should be driver (grid) penalties, fines etc

I'd love if Webber had been one of the guys almost hit by his tyre, see what he'd say about it not being the driver's fault.
It wasn't just the tyre coming off that I had an issue with, I'd like to see drivers and teams being penalised for doing a whole lap in order to retire the car and getting in everyone's way.

Killinator

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'd love if Webber had been one of the guys almost hit by his tyre, see what he'd say about it not being the driver's fault.

But what could he have done, he had no reason to believe his wheel would fly off, it really wasn't his fault!

Zcott

Vettel has weighed in on the double points thing:

Sebastien Vettel wrote:

This is absurd and punishes those who have worked hard for a whole season. Drivers, fans and experts are horrified. I value the old traditions in Formula 1 and do not understand this new rule. Imagine, in the last Bundesliga [football] match of the season there was suddenly double points.

Killinator

Zcott wrote: »

Vettel has weighed in on the double points thing:

He's not wrong

Donnelly117

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd love if Webber had been one of the guys almost hit by his tyre, see what he'd say about it not being the driver's fault.
It wasn't just the tyre coming off that I had an issue with, I'd like to see drivers and teams being penalised for doing a whole lap in order to retire the car and getting in everyone's way.

I don't know why you're singling out Webber in this, it happened multiple times during the season and AFAIK all teams were given the same penalty. I really don't see how the driver is at fault if a wheel comes off...what can they do about it? Its not like they are jettisoning them on purpose to save weight.

And as for the drivers doing a lap to get back to the pits for a new tyre I don't see how this holds everyone up? They are off the racing line watching their mirrors and probably have the race engineer on the radio telling them when cars are approaching. If every car that lost a wing or wheel retired there would be 10 times the number of retirements. If they have to retire the car whenit gets back to the pits its usually a result of assessing the damage done to the car which they cannot see until the car gets back and they can have a proper look at it. If a driver can get a car with a puncture, broken wing, wheel missing etc back to the pits undamaged I see no reason they should not be allowed to continue the race...

vectra

Deleted User wrote: »

Who got the most poles in 2013? Yeah, the guy who won the championship. He got 9 poles and the guy who came 2nd in the drivers championship got 0 poles.

So if you're giving points for pole, the points gap between Vettel and the rest would be even more ridiculous. He got 15 poles in 2011 for pete's sake.

You already get a reward for qualifying; the starting positions.

That was mostly down to the red bull dominance.

Killinator

Killinator wrote: »

But what could he have done, he had no reason to believe his wheel would fly off, it really wasn't his fault!

Drivers driving cars back to the pits at low speed and causing a hazard for everyone else should be penalised. IMO. He thought the suspension was broken so why not just pull over?

Donnelly117 wrote: »

I don't know why you're singling out Webber in this, it happened multiple times during the season and AFAIK all teams were given the same penalty. I really don't see how the driver is at fault if a wheel comes off...what can they do about it? Its not like they are jettisoning them on purpose to save weight.

Because Webber is the mouthy one about everyone. Hell look at the reprimand system that came in, who was the first one penalised?
I just don't "get" all the kudos he gets from everyone for moaning about everything and everyone else when he's at least as bad as the rest.

And as for the drivers doing a lap to get back to the pits for a new tyre I don't see how this holds everyone up? They are off the racing line watching their mirrors and probably have the race engineer on the radio telling them when cars are approaching. If every car that lost a wing or wheel retired there would be 10 times the number of retirements. If they have to retire the car whenit gets back to the pits its usually a result of assessing the damage done to the car which they cannot see until the car gets back and they can have a proper look at it. If a driver can get a car with a puncture, broken wing, wheel missing etc back to the pits undamaged I see no reason they should not be allowed to continue the race...

If missing a wheel - disqualified.
If coming to the pits to retire - just park the bloody car.

In the case of Webber in China he was in the way at the hairpin. There's a difference between someone trying to get back to the pits for repairs and getting in the way of everyone else to save a few mechanics half an hour in retrieving the car later. If someone is taking 4 minutes to do a lap then they're not going to the pits to assess damage.

vectra

vectra wrote: »

That was mostly down to the red bull dominance.

Dominance is the norm in F1 nowadays, Vettel/RB have won four titles on the trot and not long ago Ferrari/Schumi were doing similar.

If you gave points for pole during these periods what would it change? Nothing, you're just going to widen the points gap.

The reward for qualifying well is grid position, the reward for racing well is points. It works, it doesnt need to change.

Vegeta

Deleted User wrote: »

Drivers driving cars back to the pits at low speed and causing a hazard for everyone else should be penalised. IMO. He thought the suspension was broken so why not just pull over?

Because Webber is the mouthy one about everyone. Hell look at the reprimand system that came in, who was the first one penalised?
I just don't "get" all the kudos he gets from everyone for moaning about everything and everyone else when he's at least as bad as the rest.

If missing a wheel - disqualified.
If coming to the pits to retire - just park the bloody car.

In the case of Webber in China he was in the way at the hairpin. There's a difference between someone trying to get back to the pits for repairs and getting in the way of everyone else to save a few mechanics half an hour in retrieving the car later. If someone is taking 4 minutes to do a lap then they're not going to the pits to assess damage.

Criticising any driver, who was in all likelihood carrying out instructions from the team, gives an impression of bias imho.

ZiabR

When you have drivers taking the side of 95% of people and questioning this new rule, the FIA are going to have to stand up and listen. It is a crazy rule and needs to be reversed.

It is nice to see Vettel question it openly.

Vegeta

Vegeta wrote: »

Criticising any driver, who was in all likelihood carrying out instructions from the team, gives an impression of bias imho.

Anyone driving back to the pits to retire a car should be penalised. Who am I being biased against?

Infoanon

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Anyone driving back to the pits to retire a car should be penalised. Who am I being biased against?

A driver will always drive to the pits be it simply to get the car inspected after an incident or if the car is damaged it is safer to return the cars to the pits.

As for the new rules - there appears to be very little enthusiasm for double points at Abu Dhabi - a step to far for F1

Vegeta

Deleted User wrote: »

Who am I being biased against?

The driver you have chosen to single out and criticise in multiple posts above.

I think it very difficult to know for a certainty if a car will or will not be retired on return to the pits.

vectra

Deleted User wrote: »

Dominance is the norm in F1 nowadays, Vettel/RB have won four titles on the trot and not long ago Ferrari/Schumi were doing similar.

If you gave points for pole during these periods what would it change? Nothing, you're just going to widen the points gap.

The reward for qualifying well is grid position, the reward for racing well is points. It works, it doesnt need to change.

Who is to say they will be dominant next year?

smellslikeshoes

http://www.fia.com/news/call-expression-interest

Infoanon

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

http://www.fia.com/news/call-expression-interest

A bit bizzare - Bernie only wants 10 teams max, while Ferrari (and others?) want 8 teams with 3 cars each....

Donnelly117

Deleted User wrote: »

In the case of Webber in China he was in the way at the hairpin. There's a difference between someone trying to get back to the pits for repairs and getting in the way of everyone else to save a few mechanics half an hour in retrieving the car later. If someone is taking 4 minutes to do a lap then they're not going to the pits to assess damage.

Do you really think the only reason they bring the car home is to save them getting it later? With the astronomical cost of building, transporting and racing these cars I think the teams are well within their right to try and get the cars to the finish and maybe scrape a point or 2, and if that means one slow lap out of 50-70 laps then so be it.
As for blocking other cars...they are supposed to be the 22 best drivers in the world...if they cant avoid a car with 3 wheels on it moving slowly ten they should rethink their career choice.

Also if it takes 4 minutes to get back to the pits...why cant they assess the damage? Just because it takes 4 minutes to do a lap doesnt mean the damage is terminal. It takes 4 minutes because these cars are bloody hard to drive when in perfect condition...Id say its even harder when it has 3 wheels. You can see how unstable the cars are when carrying a puncture while watching the onboard when they are returning to the pits.

Max_Charger

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

http://www.fia.com/news/call-expression-interest

"The administration fee is non-refundable, and it will be offset against the total application fee of US$130’000,
which the FIA will require from those submitting full applications."

Feck, that's team Max_charger out of the running anyway!