Jump to content


Photo

Would you like to see Formula One with no pitstops?


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

Poll: Would you like to see Formula One with no pitstops? (144 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you like to see Formula One with no pitstops?

  1. Yes (58 votes [40.28%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.28%

  2. No (86 votes [59.72%])

    Percentage of vote: 59.72%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 THE "driverider"

THE "driverider"
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 19:51

Would you like to see Formula One with no pitstops? No refuelling, No tyre changes and drivers can only have a pitstop for damage or to tweak aerodynamics.

Advertisement

#2 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,347 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 25 January 2010 - 19:59

I voted yes but with a caveat. That being, the use of pitstops are is not mandated in the rules, rather, should a team so desire they can try for a no pitstop race.

#3 JKTRacing

JKTRacing
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:07

Yes, a race should be won/lost in the race track, not in the boxes

#4 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,886 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:11

depends on race. Some may be interesting only with racing on track, but in valencia let's say, only time when something is happening, is in da pit-stop-fun-time

#5 RSNS

RSNS
  • Member

  • 1,495 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:14

depends on race. Some may be interesting only with racing on track, but in valencia let's say, only time when something is happening, is in da pit-stop-fun-time


I voted yes just to counter the importance pit stops now have. But I think _optional_ tires changes and no refueling would be best.

#6 Lazarus II

Lazarus II
  • Member

  • 4,527 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:15

I voted yes but with a caveat. That being, the use of pitstops are is not mandated in the rules, rather, should a team so desire they can try for a no pitstop race.

Exactly :up: . If the team wants/nedds a pitstop, then they should have one. No mandatory pit stops, no disallowed pit stops, no must use both compounds, no can't use different compounds at the same time. Just let the cars race. KISS

Edited by Lazarus II, 25 January 2010 - 20:16.


#7 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:15

No mandatory pitstops. If they want to stop for tires, great. If they want to go through the race, great. Just leave this open.

#8 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,463 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:16

Exactly :up: . If the team wants/nedds a pitstop, then they should have one. No mandatory pit stops, no disallowed pit stops. Just let the cars race. KISS


IRL tried that, Gene Simmons proved less useful than you projected. ;)

#9 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,347 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:17

I voted yes just to counter the importance pit stops now have. But I think _optional_ tires changes and no refueling would be best.

to steal a term from facebook



:up: phil likes this






#10 Jackmancer

Jackmancer
  • Member

  • 2,894 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:46

Where's the 'I do not care' button? Seriously, overtaking and action arn't made by (lack of) pitstops in my oppinion.

#11 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,886 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 20:48

and if it would be left open, everyone would take pit stops cause now they will last with whole pit lane 100km/h around 16 sec... so only way would be to forbid it, which sounds a little stupid

#12 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,347 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:16

and if it would be left open, everyone would take pit stops cause now they will last with whole pit lane 100km/h around 16 sec... so only way would be to forbid it, which sounds a little stupid


No refueling may change the equation.

#13 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,886 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:18

No refueling may change the equation.


with refueling it is more than 20 sec


#14 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,659 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:19

I'd only approve of this if they finally get the cars to follow each other easily through fast corners.

Even then, you'd have tracks like Monaco, where pretty much nothing would happen, and the saving grace(passing in the pits) would be obsolete.

#15 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:25

Passing in the pits has nothing to do with the spirit and essence of motor racing which is man/machine vs man/machine.

So no, I won't miss pitstops in F1.

#16 Bouncing Pink Ball

Bouncing Pink Ball
  • Member

  • 733 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:25

My ideal would be nothing mandated – pit or not pit, refuel or run the full race on one tank, use whatever compound of tire a team wants and in any sequence the want.

What's the right option for that? Yes to pitstops (no in the poll)? That's what I voted, anyway...



#17 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,695 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:27

I voted yes but with a caveat. That being, the use of pitstops are is not mandated in the rules, rather, should a team so desire they can try for a no pitstop race.


That would be my option. Happy with no refueling, but not with enforced tyre changes.

#18 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,659 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:30

Passing in the pits has nothing to do with the spirit and essence of motor racing which is man/machine vs man/machine.

Sorry, but the 'essence' of motorsports is not something that is clearly defined, and is clearly different from person to person. I see no reason why race strategy shouldn't be a large part of motorsports. After all, it always has been.

#19 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:44

Sorry, but the 'essence' of motorsports is not something that is clearly defined, and is clearly different from person to person. I see no reason why race strategy shouldn't be a large part of motorsports. After all, it always has been.

That's fine for me. I express my own point of view, not that of someone else.

And if people think it's thrilling to watch people changing tyres, so be it. This is a free world.

Advertisement

#20 WACKO

WACKO
  • Member

  • 2,293 posts
  • Joined: June 03

Posted 25 January 2010 - 21:52

Yes, a race should be won/lost in the race track, not in the boxes


It would be the most boring procession you have ever seen.

#21 THE "driverider"

THE "driverider"
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:03

I think it was the 1996 Monaco Grand Prix where Mika Salo made no pitstops and finished 5th in a Tyrrell.

#22 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:04

It would be the most boring procession you have ever seen.

Doesn't matter at all. The main point of a race is not to be 'entertaining' but to find out the fastest driver/car combination.

#23 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,463 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:16

Doesn't matter at all. The main point of a race is not to be 'entertaining' but to find out the fastest driver/car combination.


Is it? :well: Did it not occur to you that the unwashed masses who show up to a race wanting to be entertained, might appreciate a good piece of engineering or driving skill when they see it? That they don't just show up hoping that the poor sod next to them will be knocked out cold by a piece of debris from yet another huge smash?

Edited by Risil, 25 January 2010 - 22:16.


#24 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:22

Is it? :well: Did it not occur to you that the unwashed masses who show up to a race wanting to be entertained, might appreciate a good piece of engineering or driving skill when they see it? That they don't just show up hoping that the poor sod next to them will be knocked out cold by a piece of debris from yet another huge smash?

No idea about the point you're trying to make with those questions.

Of course the spectators are there to get entertained; however the drivers and teams don't race to entertain the spectators, in the first place they race to beat their opponents.

#25 COUGAR508

COUGAR508
  • Member

  • 1,182 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:29

I would agree with those who favour the option of tyre stops, but with no refuelling.

#26 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,882 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:37

id be scared that nothing would happen, like motogp, but longer and without rossi. its something that really needs trying out before you know if its better

#27 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,463 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:39

No idea about the point you're trying to make with those questions.

Of course the spectators are there to get entertained; however the drivers and teams don't race to entertain the spectators, in the first place they race to beat their opponents.


The drivers and teams aren't the whole sport, not by a long shot. The body that sets the rules has to consider the effect they have on more than just the drivers and teams.

#28 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:40

No idea about the point you're trying to make with those questions.

Of course the spectators are there to get entertained; however the drivers and teams don't race to entertain the spectators, in the first place they race to beat their opponents.


I'm sure the sponsors whose money pays for the cars would like them to try and entertain the fans.

#29 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,760 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:49

no. Pitstops are part of Formula one racing, this way, or that way, it has always been. I want pitstops, but refueling is too artificial, it is good it has been banned.

#30 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,361 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 25 January 2010 - 22:55

No. I would like it to be legal not to make a pitstop but forcing everyone to no-stop would remove alot of strategy elements. We wouldnt get a huge rise in overtaking, there'd just be longer processions.

#31 Demo.

Demo.
  • Member

  • 1,205 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 23:01

I would vote yes for no mandated pitstops but no if you mean no tyre changes allowed.
Sorry it needs to be clearer with more options IMHO
hence no vote cast as i don't agree with either as posted

#32 Radoye

Radoye
  • Member

  • 848 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 23:04

My ideal would be nothing mandated – pit or not pit, refuel or run the full race on one tank, use whatever compound of tire a team wants and in any sequence the want.


Exactly. The more freedom the better, it would give someone a chance to take a risk doing something differently than the rest and maybe profit from it.


#33 Lazarus II

Lazarus II
  • Member

  • 4,527 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 25 January 2010 - 23:06

Passing in the pits has nothing to do with the spirit and essence of motor racing which is man/machine vs man/machine.

So no, I won't miss pitstops in F1.

Preach it brother :clap:

#34 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,967 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 25 January 2010 - 23:28

I thought about this, and I think, pitstops are needed mainly because overtaking has just gotten almost mission impossible like.

There's a certain element to strategies I appreciate, where there is this suspense about has this driver made up enough time to outflank a rival, and as he's getting out of the pits, we are on edge, or amazed he got out in front, I think the way formula one's rules have been going, pitstops are a nescessity because some tracks with these cars, there's just no chance to make positions up with the current cars in enough time to go for wins if you don't quali on poles.

Something about a f1 car entering and exiting a pitlane is a part of the action, especially when tracks/cars and conditions can't offer overtaking, then strategies have become crucial to the sport, some of Ross Brawn and Michael Schumacher's wins with strategy helped made interesting gps.

Formula One has to sort it's other problems out like actually being able to race with other cars and outbreak someone in the corner, these days the breaking systems are too good for the driver behind to really make a difference, we'lve been pushed into using pitstops as a way to get ahead, I like the option of the pitstop, but we depend on it too much in f1 because that's the way they've allowed the rules to go.


So I think the thread title should be something like, would you like pitstops in a world where formula one cars can race like they did decades ago? And I would say yes, because I want the strategies and pitstops/team working spirit, along with the action on track as well, the best of both worlds. Right now we have focus on pitstops because they've haven't changed the cars for the better racing.

Edited by SeanValen, 26 January 2010 - 00:06.


#35 Mungo Fangio of the Year

Mungo Fangio of the Year
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 25 January 2010 - 23:34

I voted yes, but I don't want it to be mandatory. I want those who want to change tires, to do it.


#36 Witt

Witt
  • Member

  • 3,306 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 26 January 2010 - 00:06

I voted yes but with a caveat. That being, the use of pitstops are is not mandated in the rules, rather, should a team so desire they can try for a no pitstop race.


I agree with this idea.

Mandatory pit stops are THE worst thing in motor racing. Period.

Ban refuelling, and let the teams/drivers decide if they want to pit or not for fresh tyres. Simple.

#37 De Jokke

De Jokke
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 26 January 2010 - 00:48

Pitstops should stay, including refuelling.

#38 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 26 January 2010 - 08:40

Pitstops should definitely stay allowed. Strategy is such a big and interesting part of F1, it should definitely stay. F1 should be the pinnacle of racing, technology and strategy. They're already dumbing down technology, don't remove strategy.

I want to be amazed again when someone finishes a race in the points without a pitstop (salo, monaco 1997) or when someone tries something really unexpected like a 4 stop strategy to win the race (ferrari, mangy-cours, forgot the year).

#39 CaptnMark

CaptnMark
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 26 January 2010 - 09:37

Decrease pit stop speed limit until it's viable to do a no stop (and is actually being done).

Advertisement

#40 Shevek

Shevek
  • Member

  • 265 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:03

when someone tries something really unexpected like a 4 stop strategy to win the race (ferrari, mangy-cours, forgot the year).


2004.


#41 Hippo

Hippo
  • Member

  • 2,378 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:05

I don't want to see F1 without pitstops. Ban on refueling is good. They should have removed the mandatory "use both compounds" bullcrap too.

If someone then wanted to not pit at all, fine. But it certainly would be slower, because his tires would be worse for at least half of the race.

Thinking about it I actually despise the way tires are chosen by Bridgestone too. Teams should be allowed to choose their tires instead of BS doing it. Like in the old days, when there were 4 compounds of Goodyears (classed A to D if I'm not mistaken) and everyone used the ones they deemed fit. It would reduce the atrocity of a forced single tire supplier somewhat.

#42 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,347 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:12

Thinking about it I actually despise the way tires are chosen by Bridgestone too. Teams should be allowed to choose their tires instead of BS doing it. Like in the old days, when there were 4 compounds of Goodyears (classed A to D if I'm not mistaken) and everyone used the ones they deemed fit. It would reduce the atrocity of a forced single tire supplier somewhat.


Agreed!!! End the tire restrictions. 3-4 compounds, teams decide what they want to race. Even back to when they may run softs inside and hards outside or whatever trhey choose.

No refueling.

So do you go hard with 0 or 1 pitstop, or medium with 2-3 pitstops???

Let the COMPETITORS determine the strategy not the FIA.

#43 Augurk

Augurk
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:13

2004.

Cheers :)

#44 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:19

Would you like to see Formula One with no pitstops? No refuelling, No tyre changes and drivers can only have a pitstop for damage or to tweak aerodynamics.


If there is one thing that would sort out the overtaking problem, this is it. Such rules would make finding a solution a priority. I voted 'yes' but ideally I'd like to see either no rules on tyre changes or a requirement to run different compounds.

#45 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,630 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:27

I voted yes but with a caveat. That being, the use of pitstops are is not mandated in the rules, rather, should a team so desire they can try for a no pitstop race.


:up: ditto, it should be a strategy choice, not outlawed or mandatory (and i would include the point i mentioned in the other thread about the points tweak, that if a team chooses to pit for strategic purposes, then both types of tyres must be used but they should not be forced to use both types as they are now)

#46 Jay101

Jay101
  • Member

  • 614 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:55

I don't want to see F1 without pitstops. Ban on refueling is good. They should have removed the mandatory "use both compounds" bullcrap too.

If someone then wanted to not pit at all, fine. But it certainly would be slower, because his tires would be worse for at least half of the race.

Thinking about it I actually despise the way tires are chosen by Bridgestone too. Teams should be allowed to choose their tires instead of BS doing it. Like in the old days, when there were 4 compounds of Goodyears (classed A to D if I'm not mistaken) and everyone used the ones they deemed fit. It would reduce the atrocity of a forced single tire supplier somewhat.

Not only that but they also had a super soft qualifying tyre as well.

I always prefered the multi compound days as well, far more stratergie was involved and the performance difference between tyre compounds as they were used on track I always felt helped with the on track overtaking oppertunities as well.

#47 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 26 January 2010 - 12:21

Surprising poll result. Maybe it would have been different if the question was "should pit stops be mandatory"?



#48 Hippo

Hippo
  • Member

  • 2,378 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 26 January 2010 - 12:22

Yeah I see there are people remembering how it used to be. But don't get me wrong. I didn't mean to bring back anything from 20 years ago. Times have changed. It would already be a step in the right direction, if the individual tire choice would be made by teams. Even if it has to be done months before the respective races. It wouldn't be such a foul compromise with teams rightfully complaining that sometimes BS's choice didn't suit them at all. And it would not cost any major amount of additional money, because the number of "ordered" tires would be the same as it is now.

#49 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 928 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 26 January 2010 - 12:22

I made the assumption that the poll was asking about refueling stops. Pit stops must be allowed for changing tires due to rain, or rain stopping, and punctures and the like.
Also, sometimes a nosecone needs changing. So, we shouldn't ban them completely. Ban this stupid dual compound tire nonsense, though.

#50 Raincoat

Raincoat
  • Member

  • 775 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 26 January 2010 - 12:27

Yes, a race should be won/lost in the race track, not in the boxes



I bet this would make Valencia and singapore lots of fun :rotfl: