3386 replies to this topic

[uzsjgb]

The answer is yes. Mclaren are switching to the Mercedes PU, but they have to use their tokens to make the required changes. Seems one rule for some, another for the others.

 

No, that is incorrect. There is one rule to which all the teams agreed to. To put it very clear: McLaren agreed that their PU upgrade would cost them two tokens, but the Racing Point upgrade to the 2020 Mercedes suspension would cost them zero tokens.

 

I personally think that is quite stupid and unfair, but that is what the teams all agreed to. Changing it now would also be unfair and much too late in the season.

[Kalmake]

What's specially unfair with this? Anyone can use 2020 parts in 2021, right? Red Bull farm team uses 2020 RBR suspension and gearbox already this year.

[uzsjgb]

It's both an exploit and something the teams didn't fully understand at the time. At the end of the day it offers one team an advantage over others, which doesn't seem fair tbh

 

Rule 22.8.5.b of the 2021 technical regulations reads:

"In the event the Customer Competitor has used for that TRC-H or FSC-H the 2019 specification of the Supplying Competitor during the 2020 season, but wishes to upgrade to the 2020 specification for the 2021 season, this change will be acceptable without the use of any tokens."

(Definitions of TRC-H and FSC-H are in the document.)

 

Please explain to me how it is an exploit, if Racing Point does exactly that.

 

P.S.

This issue is not new, at the end of August I had asked in this topic if the appeals by Renault and Ferrari were connected to the token system. For some time now teams have been manouvering to get the token system changed. As I understand it these attempts have ended, because the FIA has clearly stated it is too late to change this system, because development of the 2021 cars is too far underway.

Edited by uzsjgb, 23 September 2020 - 11:28.

[shure]

Rule 22.8.5.b of the 2021 technical regulations reads:

"In the event the Customer Competitor has used for that TRC-H or FSC-H the 2019 specification of the Supplying Competitor during the 2020 season, but wishes to upgrade to the 2020 specification for the 2021 season, this change will be acceptable without the use of any tokens."

(Definitions of TRC-H and FSC-H are in the document.)

 

Please explain to me how it is an exploit, if Racing Point does exactly that.

 

P.S.

This issue is not new, at the end of August I had asked in this topic if the appeals by Renault and Ferrari were connected to the token system. For some time now teams have been manouvering to get the token system changed. As I understand it these attempts have ended, because the FIA has clearly stated it is too late to change this system, because development of the 2021 cars is too far underway.

It's an exploit because I don't think people really understood just how much of the car Racing Point could carry over from Merc, so essentially they are getting free bits that others would have to spend tokens on by doing it themselves. This gives them a pretty big advantage.  It's legal, of course, but still presents them with an advantage which would probably not have been agreed had people fully understood the consequences

[pup]

There’s a simple solution to all of this, which is to change the one year restriction to two. The problem isn’t so much the copying, but rather that Mercedes is just that far ahead of everyone. In the past, even a direct copy of the last year’s winner would at best get you into the mid pack.

So change the rule, then RP will have to run the same chassis next year and all will be normal again. If the field tightens up in the future such that two year old parts relegate teams to the back of the grid, then change it back.

[pdac]

It's an exploit because I don't think people really understood just how much of the car Racing Point could carry over from Merc, so essentially they are getting free bits that others would have to spend tokens on by doing it themselves. This gives them a pretty big advantage.  It's legal, of course, but still presents them with an advantage which would probably not have been agreed had people fully understood the consequences

 

Ignorance is not any sort of argument. The wording is quite clear. It is quite clear that the rule offers an exemption to the token system. No one should have agree to this without knowing who was going to benefit and by how much.

[RedRabbit]

The rule for me is quite fine, because there is nothing really stopping a team from buying the 2020 spec for this season anyway in this situation.

The token spend for McLaren to change engine supplier on a deal that was already agreed before this season started is a bit unfortunate. But they know what the rules are and seem quite prepared, already testing parts with the new 2021 floor, so we might see them introducing all 2021 aero upgrades for the car in the last race of the season, even if they aren't ideal.

Edited by RedRabbit, 23 September 2020 - 13:07.

[shure]

Ignorance is not any sort of argument. The wording is quite clear. It is quite clear that the rule offers an exemption to the token system. No one should have agree to this without knowing who was going to benefit and by how much.

sure, we can say more fool you to Renault for missing it, but that's a different story and doesn't change the fact that the rule is inherently unfair and gives RP an advantage over others

[pdac]

sure, we can say more fool you to Renault for missing it, but that's a different story and doesn't change the fact that the rule is inherently unfair and gives RP an advantage over others

 

It may be an unfair rule, but it's something the teams all agreed to. Same as when the new PUs came in. Everyone agreed to the rules and then were annoyed and frustrated when Mercedes had done so much better than the other manufacturers and they'd all agreed to the token rules that denied the others the possibility of catching up. You cannot have it both ways. You either agree to rules, without understanding them, and have to face the consequences or else you do your homework and do not agree to the rules before you fully understand them. These people are either stupid or lazy (or both).

[dn12005]

It has not an "exploit", that is just clickbait. The rules were decided by all the teams, Renault also agreed to the token system. What Renault is actually saying is this: we did not understand what we were agreeing to and now, half a year later, we would like it changed.

This isn't accurate.

 

Renault contested the token requirement from the word go, during the COVID break.... they got no support from other teams....but because the token reg was tied into one, large reg, and for fear teams would have been in financial ruins, Renault decided to sign for the good of the sport. 

 

It was only a few months ago that some other teams (and I'm speculating here....Ferrari and McLaren) realized the benefit that would be afforded Racing Point (as well as other satellite teams), in lieu of their grievance toward RP's copying.    

 

And yes, it is quite hypocritical for Ferrari to attest this RP advantage when its own satellite teams will benefit from this as well....but Ferrari is not really threatened by their satellite teams in getting back into the Top 3 conversation for '21......but Aston Martin will be a (serious) threat.

Edited by dn12005, 23 September 2020 - 15:04.

[shure]

It may be an unfair rule, but it's something the teams all agreed to. Same as when the new PUs came in. Everyone agreed to the rules and then were annoyed and frustrated when Mercedes had done so much better than the other manufacturers and they'd all agreed to the token rules that denied the others the possibility of catching up. You cannot have it both ways. You either agree to rules, without understanding them, and have to face the consequences or else you do your homework and do not agree to the rules before you fully understand them. These people are either stupid or lazy (or both).

i suggest the teams are the last people who should be writing the rules anyway.  They're rubbish at it.

 

But that doesn't mean poor rules and/or decisions shouldn't be called out.  It's inherently unfair that McLaren have to spend tokens on the engine refit when this was something they had decided before the crisis and leaves them at a disadvantage to other teams through no fault of their own, while RP get to upgrade their car for free.  The people who write these rules are idiots.  How hard can it be to write rules that puts everyone on a level playing field?

[pdac]

This isn't accurate.

 

Renault contested the token requirement from the word go, during the COVID break.... they got no support from other teams....but because the token reg was tied into one, large reg, and for fear teams would have been in financial ruins, Renault decided to sign for the good of the sport. 

 

It was only a few months ago that some other teams (and I'm speculating here....Ferrari and McLaren) realized the benefit that would be afforded Racing Point (as well as other satellite teams), in lieu of their grievance toward RP's copying.    

 

And yes, it is quite hypocritical for Ferrari to attest this RP advantage when its own satellite teams will benefit from this as well....but Ferrari is not really threatened by their satellite teams in getting back into the Top 3 conversation for '21......but Aston Martin will be a (serious) threat.

 

It does not matter what their motivation for signing was, they signed and so they have no legitimate right to subsequently complain about it.

[beachdrifter]

What's specially unfair with this? Anyone can use 2020 parts in 2021, right? Red Bull farm team uses 2020 RBR suspension and gearbox already this year.

 

Exactly. And other teams (e. g. Haas) are already using the 2020 Ferrari parts. Racing Point is merely catching up in that regard.

 

The point of the rule in question, as FIA's Tombazis has explained, is cost savings. For example, Racing Point gets excess inventory from the older generation Mercedes. So Racing Point saves money by not having to design the parts themselves, and Mercedes still makes a few bucks with parts they'd otherwise write off. It's a very sensible rule. 

 

And that's quite different from what McLaren are doing. And yet, they should be pretty happy with the returns, too.

[ARTGP]

It does not matter what their motivation for signing was, they signed and so they have no legitimate right to subsequently complain about it.

 

Nobody ever agrees to everything they sign. You can't expect that. I'm sure you have a bank account or credit card right now with questionable terms in the accountholder agreement, favoring the bank, that you will complain about when the time comes if you have not already.

Edited by ARTGP, 24 September 2020 - 04:59.

[ARTGP]

brake ducts can't be bought - see this whole topic!

 

Suspension & steering are designed for a particular chassis.  A team's chassis must be designed and made for/by them.  Steering and suspension design is probably regarded as a 'secret' anyway, as there are numerous different versions coming out every year.

 

Steering wheels are nothing special and are designed around a particular car for an individual driver.  Viz, Kubica and his whining last year.

 

Your 'etc' would be sod all then.

 

Racing Point purchased the W10 front and rear suspension.

Racing Point did buy the W10 brake ducts last year...see this whole topic.

Haas purchased the Ferrari rear suspension.

 

Big teams are choosing which teams to supply and which teams not to supply in a blatant attempt to manipulate the championship. Red Bull have been denied Mercedes engines for YEARS. And Mclaren just happen to get engines for 2021 on a whim? Think again...

Edited by ARTGP, 24 September 2020 - 05:06.

[ARTGP]

Media and fans get ample exposure to the cars and team when the cars are on track - removing the secrecy in the garage during testing improved one thing: rivals ability to take a close up look at their opponents car, especially when it's disassembled.

 

The rule was made to give more access for fans and media.

 

 

 

A statement from the governing body said that the FIA had approved: “Wording to prevent teams from covering their cars during winter testing, in order to make these events more appealing to the media and fans.”

 

https://www.motorspo...esting/4606965/

Edited by ARTGP, 24 September 2020 - 05:07.

[vlado]

So is Vettel going to be driving a version of the W11 next year or not ? 

[ARTGP]

Yes.

[Clatter]

Racing Point purchased the W10 front and rear suspension.
Racing Point did buy the W10 brake ducts last year...see this whole topic.
Haas purchased the Ferrari rear suspension.

Big teams are choosing which teams to supply and which teams not to supply in a blatant attempt to manipulate the championship. Red Bull have been denied Mercedes engines for YEARS. And Mclaren just happen to get engines for 2021 on a whim? Think again...

Other than Merc not being willing to supply Red Bull with engines, are there any other examples of teams asking to buy parts and being denied?

[pdac]

Nobody ever agrees to everything they sign. You can't expect that. I'm sure you have a bank account or credit card right now with questionable terms in the accountholder agreement, favoring the bank, that you will complain about when the time comes if you have not already.

 

Of course you don't always agree to everything that you sign. But you accept it. That's what signing it means. You don't sign something and complain about it afterwards.

 

You might say that you wished you hadn't signed something or you wish you didn't have to do XYZ or you wish you hadn't allowed someone else to do XYZ. But you lament about what YOU have done.

 

Oh, and on a personal note ... one specific example of where I didn't agree to sign something was when I sold my house a while back. The agent charged a fixed fee for their services. I disagreed with their estimate regarding how much it would sell for (it was during the downturn). So I insisted that they took a percentage of the sale price. I offered then a rate that would make them a chunk more if they achieved the price they suggested. We both signed the deal. I ended up with far less from the sale. They ended up with far less commission.

Edited by pdac, 24 September 2020 - 08:49.

[Timstr11]

Big teams are choosing which teams to supply and which teams not to supply in a blatant attempt to manipulate the championship. Red Bull have been denied Mercedes engines for YEARS. And Mclaren just happen to get engines for 2021 on a whim? Think again...

 

Can you tell us why Mercedes is/should be responsible for RedBull's competitiveness?

[Augurk]

Can you tell us why Mercedes is/should be responsible for RedBull's competitiveness?

Obviously they aren't. However I think in a sport where we have teams that make their own engine and teams that don't and are not likely to be able to, where the teams that do supply the teams that don't, the engine supplier and racing team should be seen as two seperate entities. Then you could argue that they should be obliged to sell to any team that wants their engines, it being such a critical part of the technical side of the car. I think it's a bad situation where one racing team can influence the competitiveness of a lot of teams on the field mainly because their engine department is the best of the bunch.

 

There are rules for what an engine costs to a customer team - so effectively the teams that are being denied by the best engine supplier are forced to pay the same for an inferior product. I don't think that's healthy. 

 

There is a case to be made that in the two-tiered formula we are accustomed to the engine supplier doesn't necessarily have to supply one of the main competitors, and it's logical that all three of the top teams have their seperate engines (as is now the case). However I'm much more critical of a top team deciding the order in the midfield by willingly supplying parts to one team and not to others. 

[Rodaknee]

Big teams are choosing which teams to supply and which teams not to supply in a blatant attempt to manipulate the championship. Red Bull have been denied Mercedes engines for YEARS. And Mclaren just happen to get engines for 2021 on a whim? Think again...

Which other teams has RB helped by supplying parts since they joined F1?

[Augurk]

Also I think it's hard to understand why buying an upgrade for a part costs no tokens whereas researching and upgrading yourself (which is probably more costly at that) does. 

These regulations were meant to equalize the playing field and mitigate teams having to overspend in these troubling economic times just in order to keep up with each other. Very counterproductive to make this distinction.

 

If I had to venture a guess it probably arose from wording meant specifically for outside suppliers like Magnetti Marelli or Brembo or something like that where they were always going to buy an upgraded part for the coming season. And now it's been used to disadvantage teams that actually make and research their own parts over teams that don't. Just my guess, no fact, but if true it's a rather disgusting way of influencing the order mainly in the midfield.

[Timstr11]

LOL, RP have fast-tracked the W11 rear suspension:

https://the-race.com...cedes-rear-end/

It's going to be raced in Sochi.

[Augurk]

Are people actually enjoying seeing Mercedes and Racing Point trying to troll the rest of the field like that? 

[r4mses]

 

 

Big teams are choosing which teams to supply and which teams not to supply in a blatant attempt to manipulate the championship. Red Bull have been denied Mercedes engines for YEARS. And Mclaren just happen to get engines for 2021 on a whim? Think again...

 

So, what's the problem? You want to force Mercedes to supply their enginges to their competitors? Okay. So you'd force RBR to supply their chassis to other teams, too?

[P123]

Are people actually enjoying seeing Mercedes and Racing Point trying to troll the rest of the field like that? 

 

It's not though.  Other teams fought to have the rules changed in order to prevent RP making free changes. RP mitigated that by ensuring they had it on the car ahead of deadline should the decision target them.  I'm sure Haas and Toro Rosso will be racing with their parent teams 2020 rear ends soon enough too.  The usual fan reaction will be to kick and scream at RP.  But in this instance they are doing as the rules allow.  It's the rules that are off.

[Kalmake]

This is fine but doing this exact same thing later would have been an outrageous loophole?

[uzsjgb]

Are people actually enjoying seeing Mercedes and Racing Point trying to troll the rest of the field like that? 

 

I am, a lot.

 

A few weeks back I commented that I liked the cheekiness Racing Point displayed by copying the 2020 Mercedes front brake ducts. And now they fast-track the rear suspension to get in before the deadline of September 30, just to be on the safe side. That is good, hard work.

 

The other teams misused the brake duct affair to pressure the FIA into changing the rules. i think it is a good thing that Racing Point was not subdued, but is strongly continuing on as it has been doing.

 

Being able to do all this in such a short period of time shows us that Racing Point has a capable team and enough resources. And they have also started to move away from the Mercedes design. I am really looking forward to the car they produce under the new regulations.

[jjcale]

I am, a lot.

 

A few weeks back I commented that I liked the cheekiness Racing Point displayed by copying the 2020 Mercedes front brake ducts. And now they fast-track the rear suspension to get in before the deadline of September 30, just to be on the safe side. That is good, hard work.

 

The other teams misused the brake duct affair to pressure the FIA into changing the rules. i think it is a good thing that Racing Point was not subdued, but is strongly continuing on as it has been doing.

 

Being able to do all this in such a short period of time shows us that Racing Point has a capable team and enough resources. And they have also started to move away from the Mercedes design. I am really looking forward to the car they produce under the new regulations.

 

Do you seriously believe this??

 

Edit - that this is all down to nothing but the hard work of Racing Point. 

Edited by jjcale, 24 September 2020 - 14:23.

[ARTGP]

So, what's the problem? You want to force Mercedes to supply their enginges to their competitors? Okay. So you'd force RBR to supply their chassis to other teams, too?

 

People should be able to buy Red Bull parts if they should be able to buy Mercedes parts. 

 

Would I like this in the future? I lean between ambivalent and hard pass. But if it's going to happen anyway, then it should be completely open for everyone.

Edited by ARTGP, 24 September 2020 - 14:38.

[ARTGP]

LOL, RP have fast-tracked the W11 rear suspension:

https://the-race.com...cedes-rear-end/

It's going to be raced in Sochi.

 

jesus they are trolling.

[Clatter]

Obviously they aren't. However I think in a sport where we have teams that make their own engine and teams that don't and are not likely to be able to, where the teams that do supply the teams that don't, the engine supplier and racing team should be seen as two seperate entities. Then you could argue that they should be obliged to sell to any team that wants their engines, it being such a critical part of the technical side of the car. I think it's a bad situation where one racing team can influence the competitiveness of a lot of teams on the field mainly because their engine department is the best of the bunch.

 

There are rules for what an engine costs to a customer team - so effectively the teams that are being denied by the best engine supplier are forced to pay the same for an inferior product. I don't think that's healthy. 

 

There is a case to be made that in the two-tiered formula we are accustomed to the engine supplier doesn't necessarily have to supply one of the main competitors, and it's logical that all three of the top teams have their seperate engines (as is now the case). However I'm much more critical of a top team deciding the order in the midfield by willingly supplying parts to one team and not to others. 

 

The problem with this is that everyone would want the best engine, which could result in driving out other manufacturers from the sport. That's not a healthy place for F1 to be in the long run. Each manufacturer should be required to supply a certain percentage of the field, that would be 25% currently, if requested. That ensures that no team will be in the position of not having an engine supply, and only compelled to supply a particular team if they are not at their minimum limit.

[Augurk]

The problem with this is that everyone would want the best engine, which could result in driving out other manufacturers from the sport. That's not a healthy place for F1 to be in the long run. Each manufacturer should be required to supply a certain percentage of the field, that would be 25% currently, if requested. That ensures that no team will be in the position of not having an engine supply, and only compelled to supply a particular team if they are not at their minimum limit.

That's certainly a risk and lands F1 in between the proverbial rock and a hard place. My assessment would be that even if every supplier of an engine (or perhaps even other parts) should be forced to supply all teams that request it (except other engine manufacturer teams), wouldn't necessarily result in all customer teams converging on a single engine. There would still be reasons to deal with other suppliers, for instance to get more out of such a cooperation (Alfa/Haas model) or it would allow for a price differential from one supplier offering their engines below the maximum price. 

 

Your proposed idea wouldn't change much compared to the current regulations I think, it would still result in them cutting deals with enough teams to meet the quota before it would even be an operational rule, therefore locking out those they don't like. 

 

I'm not necessarily against the supplier/customer model as it has worked in the past, however I think currently we're moving towards too many ways of a single top team increasing their influence in the sport, even being able to select which midfield teams they will allow to perform better than others. Currently it's mostly Mercedes, and they're going borderline and beyond against the ruleset and fair play in favour of one team. But it would be the same if Red Bull or Ferrari were able to provide gamechanging parts to midfield teams and locking out those they don't like or aren't willing to vote in their favour on political F1 matters. 

 

There should be systems in place to keep these things in check.

[uzsjgb]

Do you seriously believe this??

 

Edit - that this is all down to nothing but the hard work of Racing Point. 

 

Well, it is actually just an assumption on my part. I would assume that you cannot just unscrew the old rear suspension and screw on the new one and it'll work fine. And even if it did work that way you would still be left with different setup work. Doing all that during a season, which has a race almost every weekend sounds like hard work to me.

[Myrvold]

Well, it is actually just an assumption on my part. I would assume that you cannot just unscrew the old rear suspension and screw on the new one and it'll work fine. And even if it did work that way you would still be left with different setup work. Doing all that during a season, which has a race almost every weekend sounds like hard work to me.

 

But it helps immensely that they don't have to do the design-work themselves...