95 replies to this topic

[RealRacing]

Toto Wolff on not letting drivers decide strategy: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/121838. Should F1, among the many desperate attempts to save it, allow drivers to determine their own strategy? A first step would be to cut radio comm unless it's for an emergency. I am all for making F1 more a driver's sport than a glorified marketing strategy for manufacturers.

[maximilian]

Yes.  The less the outcome is determined by the car, engine, and team, the better.

[Risil]

I'd like to see what would happen if pit-to-car telemetry and team-to-driver radio were outlawed. Let the drivers keep their radios, but they only receive safety messages from Charlie Whiting's office, and what you can fit on a pitboard.

Edited by Risil, 17 November 2015 - 23:47.

[917k]

Yes.  The less the outcome is determined by the car, engine, and team, the better.

 

F1 as it has been for the past....well, forever really. You are asking to make F1 into something it has never been.....

[oetzi]

Yeah, but cutting out all the 'do this, do that, put this knob here and that knob there' stuff might liven things up a bit.

[Marklar]

Yeah, but cutting out all the 'do this, do that, put this knob here and that knob there' stuff might liven things up a bit.

This will be banned next year. If they are really going to punish it if teams are stil doing that is a different question though...but yeah, I would be already fine with that

[Hamandeggs]

With todays policies Nigel Mansell v's piquet would have been neutralised and that Iconic  chase down is still replayed on the block. Not quite as good as Piquets rally type power slide pass on Senna in Hungary 86... that was real driver racing:)

Anything that can come close gets my vote

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=AMKPJlV-srE

Edited by Hamandeggs, 18 November 2015 - 00:23.

[oetzi]

This will be banned next year. If they are really going to punish it if teams are stil doing that is a different question though...but yeah, I would be already fine with that

A steering wheel that goes left and right and lights for slow down or stop now. That should be it. I might allow a pit board if I was feeling soft (or they were speeding).

Can they actually monitor radio traffic? Serious question?

[RealRacing]

I'd like to extend a fukc you very much to Toto then. These people actually still believe fans are secondary in F1...

Edited by RealRacing, 18 November 2015 - 00:49.

[Wuzak]

I'd like to see what would happen if pit-to-car telemetry and team-to-driver radio were outlawed. Let the drivers keep their radios, but they only receive safety messages from Charlie Whiting's office, and what you can fit on a pitboard.

 

Pit to car telemetry has been banned for many years.

 

Team to driver radio communication has been restricted a little in the last part of this season, and will be much more severely restricted next season.

 

For 2016 the radio calls will be safety related, strategy related (driver and/or team have to communicate to decide or change their strategy on the run) and reliability related (Fernando, shut down the car NOW!).

[RealRacing]

Pit to car telemetry has been banned for many years.

 

Team to driver radio communication has been restricted a little in the last part of this season, and will be much more severely restricted next season.

 

For 2016 the radio calls will be safety related, strategy related (driver and/or team have to communicate to decide or change their strategy on the run) and reliability related (Fernando, shut down the car NOW!).

Ok, but be sure they will not let drivers make their strategy decisions as HAM wanted in Brasil.

[Wuzak]

For two years Mercedes has not allowed much variance in race strategy between their two drivers, to maintain the fairness between drivers.

 

Lewis appears to be upset that he couldn't change his strategy to try to beat Nico, but the same has been the case when Lewis has been in front.

[paulogman]

It's a drivers and constructors and team sport.

There is already too much regulated.
People don't watch indy car because it's a spec series.
NASCAR is not what it once was, but it promotes better than any other motorsport
And it has a loyal regional fan base

F1 needs to be less regulated, not more

The indy 500 used to be a spectacle, but now it's just another race


Only le mans retains that unique character

[Frank Tuesday]

A steering wheel that goes left and right and lights for slow down or stop now. That should be it. I might allow a pit board if I was feeling soft (or they were speeding).

Team gets two lights on the dash that they can control. The first is "Retire to Pit Box", and the second is "Retire Immediately". To prevent coded messages, the signal for either is transmitted to timing and scoring, and the car is no longer scored once either signal is sent.

[Wuzak]

Ok, but be sure they will not let drivers make their strategy decisions as HAM wanted in Brasil.

 

Some teams will allow the driver to make the call, others will not.

 

Hamilton called for new tyres in Monaco, and he lost.

 

Apart from teh first few races in 2014, Mercedes has kept their drivers on the same strategy, except when one of them has got into difficulty of some description. Hamilton wants to change that because he was behind?

[RealRacing]

For two years Mercedes has not allowed much variance in race strategy between their two drivers, to maintain the fairness between drivers.

 

Lewis appears to be upset that he couldn't change his strategy to try to beat Nico, but the same has been the case when Lewis has been in front.

I really don't care what Mercedes or others are doing to avert racing. What I do know is the more powers the drivers are given, the better the show will become. VET and HAM have already hinted that they would like that and surely fans would too, so what is F1 waiting for? To lose all viewership to MotoGP?

[RealRacing]

Apart from teh first few races in 2014, Mercedes has kept their drivers on the same strategy, except when one of them has got into difficulty of some description. Hamilton wants to change that because he was behind?

OF COURSE! He wants to race, he wants to win! Never in F1 have driver and team agendas been so discrepant and that has been to the detriment of fans mostly.

[Marklar]

Some teams will allow the driver to make the call, others will not.
 
Hamilton called for new tyres in Monaco, and he lost.
 
Apart from teh first few races in 2014, Mercedes has kept their drivers on the same strategy, except when one of them has got into difficulty of some description. Hamilton wants to change that because he was behind?

To be fair he is demanding that now for a very long time, even when he was winning.

[KingTiger]

It's a drivers and constructors and team sport.

There is already too much regulated.
People don't watch indy car because it's a spec series.
NASCAR is not what it once was, but it promotes better than any other motorsport
And it has a loyal regional fan base

F1 needs to be less regulated, not more

The indy 500 used to be a spectacle, but now it's just another race


Only le mans retains that unique character

 

Le Mans has been neutered a million times already. 

[ViMaMo]

Toto Wolff on not letting drivers decide strategy: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/121838. Should F1, among the many desperate attempts to save it, allow drivers to determine their own strategy? A first step would be to cut radio comm unless it's for an emergency. I am all for making F1 more a driver's sport than a glorified marketing strategy for manufacturers.

 

 

Yes, drivers should be able to determine their strategy. But they are busy racing right? 

Edited by ViMaMo, 18 November 2015 - 01:52.

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

In 1926 Alfred Neubauer hung out a pit board, and for the first time, drivers were no longer on their own. Of course radios have magnified this effect, to where today we have drivers having to ask if they could wipe their noses, and instructed on everything.

 

But this current level of extreme has brought about the situation where no driver can claim credit that he won anything on his own merit, and it's all dictated by the team.

 

First issue, the team. As long as both cars wear the same sponsorship, we will have team orders. So just make it mandatory that every car wears different advertising sponsor logos. That would completely negate team orders because the driver in the Sony sponsored car will not give way because his sponsor, Sony, would be extremely unhappy. Very pissed.

 

The second is the telemetry. Drivers receive most of their instructions as a result of telemetry being interpreted back in the pits. So allow the cars to log data (for later reference), just don't allow them to transmit it.

 

The NASCAR system is very good, and it should be copied. The driver gives verbal feedback to his engineer/crew chief, they interpret it, and advise the driver. But in the end, it is the driver making  many major decisions, and if he wins, it was 100% on his own merit. Each car, even on huge multi-car teams have their own crew, and once the race is underway, on their own, divorced from the main team itself.

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

I am all for making F1 more a driver's sport than a glorified marketing strategy for manufacturers.

 

 

 

This is one of the disconnects Formula One suffers, many (like Toto) have lost sight of the simple fact that Formula One exists for the fans. Not the manufacturers and teams, not the rocks stars, not politicians, but ordinary working class Joes like you and me. If we did not watch, sponsors would have no reason to get involved, manufacturers would go elsewhere. It is that simple, it does not require a lengthy explanation.

 

And for the massive majority, we watch to see exciting action, and to see what the drivers do. The drivers, they are the point of the spear, the main attraction. So instead of shackling them with team politics and other crap, give them the tools to go racing and turn them loose. Because that's what we want to see, drivers competing against each other, and may the best man win.

[Wuzak]

 

This is one of the disconnects Formula One suffers, many (like Toto) have lost sight of the simple fact that Formula One exists for the fans.

 

Really?

 

F1 was created in 1947 to cater to fans?

[CoolBreeze]

They should ban radio. Only the team can contact the drivers, and inform them of safety issues, such as 'double yellows at turn 2'. And also perhaps 'box this lap' 

[RealRacing]

 

This is one of the disconnects Formula One suffers, many (like Toto) have lost sight of the simple fact that Formula One exists for the fans. Not the manufacturers and teams, not the rocks stars, not politicians, but ordinary working class Joes like you and me. If we did not watch, sponsors would have no reason to get involved, manufacturers would go elsewhere. It is that simple, it does not require a lengthy explanation.

 

And for the massive majority, we watch to see exciting action, and to see what the drivers do. The drivers, they are the point of the spear, the main attraction. So instead of shackling them with team politics and other crap, give them the tools to go racing and turn them loose. Because that's what we want to see, drivers competing against each other, and may the best man win.

Yes. I don't remember back in the day, when I started watching, if people even knew who the TPs of the teams were. In any case, TPs are employees, much more so than drivers. They should be there to make sure things work right, not much more. Nowadays it seems they are the eyes and ears of the manufacturers' boards of directors. It's time to put the drivers back where they belong and that is at the top of the hierarchy of what is important in F1 and auto racing.

 

People don't seem to be noticing that current F1, if it doesn't change dramatically next year, will be the culprit of two champions leaving the sport without much glory. Will this be the definite sign they need to drastically change?

[Otaku]

I'd like to see what would happen if pit-to-car telemetry and team-to-driver radio were outlawed. Let the drivers keep their radios, but they only receive safety messages from Charlie Whiting's office, and what you can fit on a pitboard.

 

Pit to car telemetry has been banned for ages. Car to pit is another thing and yes, just download all the data after the race. During the race, let the driver make ALL the decisions.

[jonpollak]

F1 today is a mirror of the world and all its messedUpness.

[Christbiscuit]

And to think people got snotty with Vettel when he ignored Multi 21

[ANF]

Toto Wolff on not letting drivers decide strategy: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/121838. Should F1, among the many desperate attempts to save it, allow drivers to determine their own strategy?

The question really is whether Mercedes should allow both sides of the garage to determine their own strategy. And the answer to that has to be yes. For ****'s sake, yes! It's depressing to hear that they have one strategist who makes the calls for both drivers.

[MikeMM]

Is it time to make F1 a driver's sport?

 

That would be great.

But there are many persons who oppose this idea. 

[Nonesuch]

Is it time to make F1 a driver's sport?

The drivers are already an important part of the sport. It's why Hamilton, Vettel, Alonso, and Räikkönen are champions and Rosberg, Webber, Fisichella, and Massa are not.
 

Should F1, among the many desperate attempts to save it, allow drivers to determine their own strategy?

Why would they do that? The teams are in F1 to win and to accomplish that they have hired people to device the best possible strategy (except perhaps for Williams).

The drivers already have important input on the strategy when it comes to weather conditions, but their momentary frustrations during a dry race are not usually a source of great strategic decisions.

Edited by Nonesuch, 18 November 2015 - 11:40.

[maximilian]

F1 as it has been for the past....well, forever really. You are asking to make F1 into something it has never been.....

I am well aware of that, but unfortunately F1 is boring the living crap out of me as the constructors' championship it is, and technology has changed considerably over the past decades, which has been discussed at length.  So either it needs to make a major change towards back to the drivers, or people will simply switch it off and watch something that's actually interesting.

[FullThrottleF1]

The constructors part of F1 I alway's find interesting. Looking at Mercedes W05 wooshing down a straight at 200 mph with sparks flying out of the back, that is F1!

[maximilian]

The constructors part of F1 I alway's find interesting. Looking at Mercedes W05 wooshing down a straight at 200 mph with sparks flying out of the back, that is F1!

 

True, but what's absolutely NOT interesting is everybody else wooshing down 20 seconds later.

[pdac]

Get rid of drivers and replace them with computers - they are much more reliable and cheaper. And they don't whine on the radio all the time.

[Kalmake]

FIA couldn't police who decides on strategy. It would be like the infamous team orders ban.

[RealRacing]

 Why would they do that? The teams are in F1 to win and to accomplish that they have hired people to device the best possible strategy (except perhaps for Williams).

The drivers already have important input on the strategy when it comes to weather conditions, but their momentary frustrations during a dry race are not usually a source of great strategic decisions.

That was kind of the point I was trying to encourage discussion on: IMO, to improve the show, the drivers should be the ones making those decisions. Strategy is a key element in winning races and if it´s all decided by computers basically you are taking away one more variable that could determine an outcome. In other words, all the efficiency may win a manufacturer races, championships and following of marketing sheep, but it certainly is driving racing fans away to other more interesting categories, lie MotoGP.

 

At the end of the day, if you follow F1 to tell friends at the club that the same brand of car you own is dominating F1, we might as well have computers driving the cars or televised R&D sessions of the different car factories. Yay we just increased kilometers per liter by four millimeters!

[PlatenGlass]

There's always going to be some conflict between the interests of teams and drivers, but I wouldn't be averse to a nudge in the direction of drivers. Whether that means getting rid of team radio, telemetry, or all the buttons I don't know, but something could be done.

But I think the larger issue is that most fans are more interested in the drivers than the teams. Obviously some will disagree, mainly Ferrari fans probably, but it's difficult to get behind a corporation in the way that you can get behind a person. Sometimes I might like a team, but it's generally very transient and a result of it happening to have drivers I like at that particular time.

So why have teams at all? Well, it wouldn't really be F1 without teams, but replace "F1" with "the pinnacle of motorsport" and there's no reason why the pinnacle of motorsport needs to have teams. I can't think of anything better than 26 or so of the best drivers in the world battling it out in equal equipment over the course of a season.

I accept that some people find the different cars interesting - not in that they necessarily like the teams - but that drivers in different cars adds an extra dimension and it adds a bit of mystery to the "who's the best driver" question. But really? Would tennis or golf be better if the titles were determined by who had the best racket/club? Would the added mystery be enough to outweigh the negatives? No. Stattos would also surely much prefer a level playing field. Statistics would have much more meaning and would be a much better measure of a driver's greatness. Ultimately F1 needs to be overcome by a drivers' formula. But yeah, I've gone a bit OT here, but never mind.

[redreni]

Although I disagree in principle with the notion that motor racing should be primarily about the driver, because I regard the fact that it's a team sport as one of its biggest strengths, I do find this particular idea interesting. Not, perhaps, for the same reasons as RealRacing.

 

My reasoning is that, in order to have consistently interesting races, it's important to encourage different strategy choices. When there is one strategy that is better than all alternative strategies, the trouble is that all the teams have enough computer and brainpower working on the problem to arrive at the right answer, which means they can all arrive at the same answer and do the same thing. If the drivers had to rely on feel and their own reading of the race, it could no longer be taken for granted that everyone would arrive at the same answer.

 

On the other hand, the competitors would need to lower their sights. They would have to start adopting much simpler decision procedures, with the aim of picking a good strategy most of the time, as opposed to the highly sophisticated real-time analysis that goes on now, which is aimed at instantaneously calculating the optimum strategy. They may find that deciding a strategy at the start and sticking to it almost regardless of anything else, would be a better bet on average, than having the driver using too much of his mental capacity on real-time strategy decisions.

 

I don't know, RealRacing, whether you envisage a rules set where drivers would be allowed to know gaps to cars that they may be racing but which are not immediately in front of them or immediately behind? Would they, for example, be allowed to monitor their gap to a car that is three positions behind them in order to know whether they have the gap to pit and rejoin ahead of said car? If not, wouldn't we be introducing an extra element of luck into races, since it might seem like a perfectly good idea for a driver to pit at a given juncture, and it would be impossible for a driver to know that his race was then about to be ruined by a slower car that is on a quirky 1-stop and is going to sit in front of him lapping slowly for a dozen laps.

[pdac]

What really disappointed me on Sunday and what has been said since is that Mercedes and Toto seem to think it is still important to ensure the get the results they want. What I think is that they have the WDC and WCC already and there focus should now be on helping F1 to retain the interest of the fans.

 

They had a perfect opportunity to show how much they value the sport on Sunday - it would have cost them nothing. Sadly, I guess, perhaps they did show how much they value the sport and it seemed to me to be **** the sport, **** the fans, we're only here for the business advantages it brings.

Edited by pdac, 18 November 2015 - 21:09.

[warp]

F1 needs to be less regulated, not more

 

 

This.

 

If I miss something from old F1 is that teams could come up with something better any weekend and technologies and drivers were pushed to the limit.

 

If I want to see who is better than the other competitors, I rather watch something else. In any sport where you need equipment to perform it, equipment will always skew the results.

 

As mentioned, F1 has always been about team AND driver. Since day one.

 

EDIT... I'd like to see drivers to be less coached from the pitwall, though. This micromanaging is too much. 

Edited by warp, 18 November 2015 - 21:24.

[RealRacing]

Although I disagree in principle with the notion that motor racing should be primarily about the driver, because I regard the fact that it's a team sport as one of its biggest strengths, I do find this particular idea interesting. Not, perhaps, for the same reasons as RealRacing.

 

 

I don't know, RealRacing, whether you envisage a rules set where drivers would be allowed to know gaps to cars that they may be racing but which are not immediately in front of them or immediately behind? Would they, for example, be allowed to monitor their gap to a car that is three positions behind them in order to know whether they have the gap to pit and rejoin ahead of said car? If not, wouldn't we be introducing an extra element of luck into races, since it might seem like a perfectly good idea for a driver to pit at a given juncture, and it would be impossible for a driver to know that his race was then about to be ruined by a slower car that is on a quirky 1-stop and is going to sit in front of him lapping slowly for a dozen laps.

How is F1 being a team sport one of its biggest strengths?

 

Ideally races should have no pit stops (see MotoGP), that way you force them to race on track. And if pit stops are needed, let that be another element in a driver's strategy, tell them about gaps with boards and allow them to make mistakes and get lucky or unlucky. After all, those mistakes will create new and different possibilities for racing and, in many instances, bring the best out of drivers.

 

These are auto races for god's sake, not trying to dock a shuttle to the space station or heart surgery. The definition of boring is things going as planned...

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

What really disappointed me on Sunday and what has been said since is that Mercedes and Toto seem to think it is still important to ensure the get the results they want. What I think is that they have the WDC and WCC already and there focus should now be on helping F1 to retain the interest of the fans.

 

They had a perfect opportunity to show how much they value the sport on Sunday - it would have cost them nothing. Sadly, I guess, perhaps they did show how much they value the sport and it seemed to me to be **** the sport, **** the fans, we're only here for the business advantages it brings.

 

Well said. The parent company, Mercedes Benz, is an auto manufacturer involved in Formula One to generate a brand awareness not for the fans but customers looking to buy a car. The funds dedicated to this enterprise are approved by the Board of Governors, and as anyone in business knows, it is dictated by the bean counters, not passionate fans. Wolff gets his instructions not to please fans, but to achieve specific goals set down by his bosses.

 

And it's not too hard to make a reasonable assumption what those guidelines are, to have Mercedes cars finish 1 - 2 in every race, the end result the WCC and WDC. It isn't about the driver, it is about making sure that Mercedes look good. Good not for the Formula One fan, but prospective customers in the market for a Benz.

[August]

There are good and bad aspects of F1 (and other motorsports) being team sports. One advantage of motorsports being a team sport is the pit strategies. Some people argue getting rid of pit stops would make it totally to the drivers, yet races without pit stops just lack something in my opinion.

 

But there are also bad things about being a team sport. The biggest is if there's too much disparity between teams, which especially can happen when teams design their own cars. I'm not advocating F1 should become a spec series, quite the opposite, but it needs to find a way to have more parity while being an open formula. (OK, this wasn't really the point of this thread.)

 

But another issue is team's benefit taking the priority in strategies, and racing in general. Maybe F1 should move from current two-car constructor/teams into something more like two one-car teams run by the constructor. Something like Mercedes running Petronas Mercedes and BlackBerry Mercedes teams. Currently, it's fine for Merc if they're running 1-2 and the order doesn't matter unless only one car is eligible for the WDC. By having two teams by one constructor, they'd push each other to limits; BlackBerry Merc wouldn't be happy to finish second behind the Petronas Merc. Heck, give each car an own pit stall so that there's no risk of double-stacking. IndyCar can do that, also F1 should be able for it.

[KingTiger]

A little bit, yes. Drivers should be making their own pit strategies, not the army of engineers on the pit board. 

 

It's a bit similar to the aerodynamic rules, hundreds of millions are poured in only to create a worse product for the fans. 

[Fonzey]

Preferably not...

 

It's a constructors formula, always has been - at least in my living memory.

 

The "real" fix for F1 is for it to be competetive up front, across more than one team. Issues about pit strategy and priority pit calls would soon go out of the window if both Mercs were racing both Ferrari's every weekend. I'm a Lewis fan first, so an inherent Mercedes fan - so don't think this is anti-Merc, but one team romping is not good for the sport - trying to patch that issue with other fixes to give us a bit of short term fun is a bad idea.

 

1) Take tyres out of the equation by making them consistent with massive operating windows, that will improve the tolerances for improving the cars

2) Mid season testing, maybe even with diminishing returns (WCC leaders get fewer test days), all test days must be public and operate on the Monday following a Grand Prix where applicable to reduce logistics cost.

3) Customer cars, allows works teams to recoup some funding whilst allowing some rich kids to have a hobby for a few seasons. There are enough rich kids in the world to keep 1/3 of the grid populated with pay drivers that rotate every year as they get bored and move onto sailing or whatever.

[pup]

Toto Wolff on not letting drivers decide strategy: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/121838. Should F1, among the many desperate attempts to save it, allow drivers to determine their own strategy? A first step would be to cut radio comm unless it's for an emergency. I am all for making F1 more a driver's sport than a glorified marketing strategy for manufacturers.

There will always be one strategy that the computers say is the best.  So if you give the drivers the choice, they're both going to pick the same one anyway.  The only reason they might not is if there is some sort of major setup difference, or something that makes one driver not be able to use the preferred strategy.

 

So both drivers start the race on strategy A.  If there is no team radio, then they pretty much have to stick with that since they can't tell the team they're coming in or what tires they want, etc.  If there is still radio, then let's say driver 2, the one who's stuck like Hamilton, wants to switch to a riskier strategy.  Fair enough, but driver 1 would be pissed if the team didn't tell him that, so they do.  He gives it half a second of thought, and then tells them he's switching, too.  Why wouldn't he?  He's ahead and driver 2 can't pass, so as long as they're on the same strategy, he's ok.  So now both drivers are still on the same strategy, only a worse one than before, and driver 2 is still stuck behind driver 1.  

[bub]

There will always be one strategy that the computers say is the best.  So if you give the drivers the choice, they're both going to pick the same one anyway.  The only reason they might not is if there is some sort of major setup difference, or something that makes one driver not be able to use the preferred strategy.

 

So both drivers start the race on strategy A.  If there is no team radio, then they pretty much have to stick with that since they can't tell the team they're coming in or what tires they want, etc.  If there is still radio, then let's say driver 2, the one who's stuck like Hamilton, wants to switch to a riskier strategy.  Fair enough, but driver 1 would be pissed if the team didn't tell him that, so they do.  He gives it half a second of thought, and then tells them he's switching, too.  Why wouldn't he?  He's ahead and driver 2 can't pass, so as long as they're on the same strategy, he's ok.  So now both drivers are still on the same strategy, only a worse one than before, and driver 2 is still stuck behind driver 1.  

 

Driver 2 could tell the team he wants to switch strategy to plan B but then if driver 1 is told about this and pits first to cover him, driver 1 could then choose to stay out on plan A. Something like that could be interesting.

[bub]

I think teams should allow their drivers to have the final say on strategy. I think it could make things more interesting and at the end of the day the driver usually wants the same thing that the team wants (i.e., for that driver to finish as high up the order as possible and gain as many points as possible).

[beqa16v]

Those calling for the return of the good old days have to remember that most races in those good old days were just as boring as the 2015 Brazilian GP. Back in the 90s when I started to watch F1 it was enough to see the drivers on TV and watch the cars go fast, that was enough for a thrill. That's not enough nowadays, its like a drug, we want more and more from it.