Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2007 Formula One Thread
- Thread starter R.Youden
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why? Watching people cleaning up the race track is more interesting than watching race cars running behind safety car.
Yes, "pausing the race" would be more like it. Currently there are *no* pit strategies involved with the safety car, because of the new rules. So the race is effectively being paused beucase nothing happens when the safety car is out. At least nothing should happen, at least nothing like Japan.
Anyway, race-wise, it's just as good to drive cars to pits not allowing teams to do anything to the cars during the pause. They could even not allow drivers to step out of their cars, but I can't see why it would be a bad thing if someone went to toilet and the race started without him
Contracts can be twisted. If it says "tv company will have to broadcast cars running on the track while the race is on" then someone could say "there is no racing while the safety car is running on the track" and therefore there would be no problem.
Cars running around with no racing is just stupid. Waste of time and fuel.
Yes, "pausing the race" would be more like it. Currently there are *no* pit strategies involved with the safety car, because of the new rules. So the race is effectively being paused beucase nothing happens when the safety car is out. At least nothing should happen, at least nothing like Japan.
Anyway, race-wise, it's just as good to drive cars to pits not allowing teams to do anything to the cars during the pause. They could even not allow drivers to step out of their cars, but I can't see why it would be a bad thing if someone went to toilet and the race started without him
i think it's thought of as a tv show and the cars still being on the track gives the illusion of the show going on. plus i guess they can get feedback from all those people on the track as to the condition of the track.
More twists this season...
Docking points from Hamilton and penalising him 10 places would really shake things up...
Docking points from Hamilton and penalising him 10 places would really shake things up...
and there's also some sort of hearing to decide whether super aguri are entitled to points since they may not be a constructor (as their chassis is last year's honda) within the meaning of the concorde agreement. If sato is stripped of his places and the points reallocated, i think alonso will end up with one more point.
Why would they? It's called "racing" and if you take it out from th F1, it's not worth watching anymore.
The last race made it clear that there would me a whole lot more racing in F1 if there would be less grip. That can be had by:
1) having a rain race
2) changing rules, so:
a) tyres would have less grip
b) aerodynamics would be less powerful
c) brakes would have less grip
IMO, changing tyre regulations has been worthless. Since the introduction of groove tyres in 1998 every year there has been more grip, with the exception of 2006 when you couldn't change tyres during the race (which was a good thing, except that they would have had to allow changing a tyre on dangerous conditions). Tyre companies have more knowhow about tyres than any FIA member, so FIA can never make such tyre rules that would serve the purpose. They can only enforce "a change", which teams would have to adapt, some faster than others but give it two years there is no difference.
Also, teams are "infintely" wiser than FIA about aerodynamics, so changing aero rules is not working. FIA could deny wings or such parts, but that would still not mean much. One thing that FIA could do and make sense would be denying changing the car during the season. Teams would have to give a spec car before the season and then after each race FIA would compare the race car to the spec given to them before the season. That would be cool
But still, braking is the most intersting aspect to me. Currently brakes are so great that the distance it takes to decelerate the car is close to nothing. If it took hundred meters more to make the car stop, there would also be more variance in when to begin braking. Now everyone brakes at the same spot, which makes overtaking very hard. Change regulations so brakes would lose power! That would mean drivers would have to adjust to the situation, but they surely would. After that, because nobody wants to hit the wall top speed, drivers would begin braking earlier; and that would again give drivers something to "race" about. Currently, you either hit it or miss it, but were the brakes so powerful, things would be a lot more interesting. Someone would be able to drive a turn a little faster, thus being able to brake a little later. Someone else would take it on the safe side and brake a little earlier. Those differences turn into overtaking opportunities more likely than adding one more groove to the tyres!
Anyway, this is way off-topic so I'm going to stop now.
I don't see why Kubica and Massa would be penalized. They both finished, and there really wasn't any incident to speak of, aside from each of them pushing the other off the track a bit on exit.
Here's the Youtube video in question.
Lewis is likely more than five lengths from the safety car, god knows what he was playing at, but surely it's still Vettel's fault for crashing into Webber?
Lewis is likely more than five lengths from the safety car, god knows what he was playing at, but surely it's still Vettel's fault for crashing into Webber?
Oh totally Vettel's fault, but Hamilton was driving erratically which will have an effect on the cars behind. Webber is not allowed to overtake Hamilton so when he slowed dramatically Webber had to brake suddenly and if Vettel was distracted by Hamilton diving to the right of the track then it would not help the situation.
The key is that when Webber was first interviewed he blamed Vettel and not Hamilton. I think there maybe a bit of mud stirring when this video came out.
Yes!
i think Webber is a great driver but I don't think I have ever heard anyone complain quite so much! Mind you DC does his fair share too so the engineers at Red Bull get ear ache pretty quick.
I'm not sure about F1, but there is no doubt he'll have done it before. No excuse for that, actually, I hope they do at least punish him in some way because they've set precedents in the past.
You're right, he probably has followed a safety car at some stage, but I'm not so sure he should be penalised. It looks a bit like he lost his way himself and the rain could be given as a reason for dispensation.
Whatever happens, aybe it would be good for him to lose his Japan points and then win the next two straight and still take the title
Having watched the video it is clear that it is Vettels fault. Webber was crusiing and so was Vettel then it seems as if he loses concentration and either accelerates or Webber brakes. If this happened out on the road then it is no doubt whose fault it is the person behind. In those conditions the tolerable limits of driving should be extended. However if the incident is under investigation then it can come down purely on a technical point which this video shows Hamilton was not within the required distance of the safety car. However due to the conditions it will come down to judgement and testimonials. Hamilton can claim that following the line of the safety car was in a line of too much spray and thus dangerous hence him moving out to the edge of the track. In all honesty I don't see the blame lying on hamiltons shoulders but who knows what they will decide.
Didn't hamilton lead the pack behind the safety car before (Canada after Kubicas accident??) and there was some controversy then as well, relating to distances to the safety car also. However that was in the dry and it was shown that hamilton was perfectly within the rules IIRC.
