70 replies to this topic

[PlatenGlass]

We've all got our favourite examples of races that were turned on their head by a safety car or red flag etc., causing the winner to change, perhaps with knock-on effects for the championship. F1 (or perhaps motor racing in general), far more than almost any other sport, has this lottery aspect to it. No football team has their 5-0 lead wiped out due to an accident because the pitch needs to be cleaned up.

 

With safety cars, virtual safety cars, red flags, aggregate timing, closed pitlanes and anything else you can think of at your disposal, what is the best way to ensure that the race after an incident is in the same shape as it was before the accident to the best degree possible?

 

I will come back with my own ideas, but I wanted to use the opening post just to set up the problem.

[PayasYouRace]

VSC obviously works really well right now. In this regard.

 

I'll advocate for using the delta time system to restore gaps after anything that neutralises the race and bunched everyone together. It takes one lap to restore the gaps using this method, and the "lottery" will be entirely removed.

[Anderis]

I pretty much only got interested in F1 because it was quite a bit of a lottery some of the time.

 

No football team has their 5-0 lead wiped out due to an accident because the pitch needs to be cleaned up.

This is the reason why I started following F1 more and football, which was my previous big passion, less. In F1 it was never over until it was over, while in football, the last couple dozen minutes can have no meaning in determining the final result. That's why F1 was more exciting.

 

 

Now it's a bit less of a lottery than it was when I started watching (around 2007) and it already feels like almost every race has the same forgettable result.

 

So pardon me, I will not take part in the discussion because I'm not interested to reduce the lottery nature in F1 to the lowest possible level. It will lose a lot of appeal to me that way.

[OO7]

VSC obviously works really well right now. In this regard.

 

I'll advocate for using the delta time system to restore gaps after anything that neutralises the race and bunched everyone together. It takes one lap to restore the gaps using this method, and the "lottery" will be entirely removed.

I like this idea.  Another one is after a red flag, release the cars from the pitlane in order and with their pre-red flag gaps.

[balmybaldwin]

The VSC is terrible. apart from drivers being able to game the system for a few seconds advantage, it's release also alters the gaps.  It also renders the whole course yellow. I really don't understand why we can't have slow zones with the cars limited to pit limiter for just the zone with the accident and leave the rest of the track green.

[Pingu Pi]

The VSC is terrible. apart from drivers being able to game the system for a few seconds advantage, it's release also alters the gaps.  It also renders the whole course yellow. I really don't understand why we can't have slow zones with the cars limited to pit limiter for just the zone with the accident and leave the rest of the track green.

I would imagine this runs the risk of further incidents occuring whilst the original is being sorted.

Also leaves the opportunity for drivers to accidently be dicing competitively and trying to remain close through a yellow flag area with marshals on track and all the safety concerns that come with that.

[LolaB0860]

- Permanent race stewards making the decisions, no celebrity VIP ex drivers making one-off appearances

- Nurburgring 24h style slow zones + local yellows, no safety car or VSC (red flag only if there's like a track blocking pileup at Monaco or something, or Grosjean incident)

- Better maximum GP time limit + make start times earlier than now = both to avoid rushing into half-assed decisions with sunset or other limit closing in

- No artificially crappy tires for the 'show' to cause problems before and after those incidents

- Monsoon tires

Edited by LolaB0860, 09 April 2023 - 21:47.

[ANF]

60/80 km/h slow zones may not be totally fair every time, but they ensure that racing can continue on other parts of the circuit while a car is recovered. I watched the Super Formula race today and the race was interrupted by the safety car for eleven minutes because one car had spun and stopped in one corner. These full course interruptions are incredibly boring to watch and they appear in almost every race in almost every racing series.

[JHSingo]

Nothing - leave as is. 

 

The "lottery" can be what suddenly turns a snooze fest into a classic, edge-of-the-seat thriller. 

 

I don't want to see artificial gimmicks introduced purely for the sake of spicing up the show, but I have no problem with safety cars, red flags, or anything else. They're just part and parcel of racing. Sometimes you can be the best on the day, and still not win for any number of reasons outside your control - sudden mechanical failure, problem in the pits, a sudden rain shower - but that's what makes the sport so much more compelling than something like football, where you know if a game's 2-0 at halftime, it's pretty much game over. At least, in my opinion.

 

It amazes me that F1 went through an extremely boring and predictable era in the early 2000s, and people are genuinely wanting to come up with ideas that would undoubtedly make the sport much "fairer", but also a hell of a lot more boring.  

Edited by JHSingo, 09 April 2023 - 23:11.

[ARTGP]

Lottery is fine when there is a legitimate reason for using the red flag...The problem is now red flags are being flown willy nilly and the lottery no longer looks organic. It looks forced.   What kind of luddite thinks an F1 race should have 3 standing starts in it. 

Edited by ARTGP, 10 April 2023 - 00:18.

[Ruusperi]

I'd say there's a lack of "old school" lottery, which means technical retirements or wet weather retirements caused by spin-offs into the gravel trap and crashes. Both are very rare nowadays. Reliability is so good that often we have races with zero technical retirements, something that was completely unheard of 20 years ago. And wet racing really doesn't happen, because if there's a single spin or crash, it's instant red flag. So no real chance for lottery like 20 years ago.

 

Instead we have this artificial lottery created by randomness of the race director's calls for VSC/SC/Red-flag and randomness of stewards' decisions for penalties. Ironically, over 20 years ago those were predictable things: race director would only bring out the SC for huge accidents, and red flag was really never used, even when a driver was injured (Ralf Indy '04, Kubica Canada '07). And the penalty was Stop-and-Go for nearly all situations.

 

So, I'd give more chances for natural randomness and try to limit decision-based lottery by FIA.

[Rediscoveryx]

I'd say there's a lack of "old school" lottery, which means technical retirements or wet weather retirements caused by spin-offs into the gravel trap and crashes. Both are very rare nowadays. Reliability is so good that often we have races with zero technical retirements, something that was completely unheard of 20 years ago. And wet racing really doesn't happen, because if there's a single spin or crash, it's instant red flag. So no real chance for lottery like 20 years ago.

Instead we have this artificial lottery created by randomness of the race director's calls for VSC/SC/Red-flag and randomness of stewards' decisions for penalties. Ironically, over 20 years ago those were predictable things: race director would only bring out the SC for huge accidents, and red flag was really never used, even when a driver was injured (Ralf Indy '04, Kubica Canada '07). And the penalty was Stop-and-Go for nearly all situations.

So, I'd give more chances for natural randomness and try to limit decision-based lottery by FIA.

Good point.

The mandated reliability was one of the worst things that the governing body has introduced imho.

I think the current mix is pretty much fine, with the caveat that there is still room for improvement on the procedural side of things (such as; don’t bother with this whole unlapping thing during safety cars, just get the d*mn race started again as soon as the track is clear). And something needs to be done to allow wet weather racing again.

[IrvTheSwerve]

Lottery is fine when there is a legitimate reason for using the red flag...The problem is now red flags are being flown willy nilly and the lottery no longer looks organic. It looks forced.   What kind of luddite thinks an F1 race should have 3 standing starts in it. 

Exactly this.

 

Red flags and safety cars mixing up the order are all part of the sport. The issue is the feeling of the ‘competition caution’ creeping into the sport.

[WOT]

I'm a traditionalist (from waaaaay back). Once they sort out the "cheese" tyre issue, I believe "slow zones" (no safety car) are the answer (with a proviso of equality that the whole field has to go through the slow zone). Electronically slow them down to "walking speed" through a crash site mini-sector and then continue to race around the rest of the circuit. If there is a delayed "clean-up" process, then red flag with a rolling start and aggregate times.

 

Red flag: 

1. Any repair work must be taken back into the garage and the repaired car released at the back of the field.

2. Teams have telemetry to see if a tyre has been punctured by red flag debris, a similarly aged tyre can be replaced on pit road.

3. No unlapping of lapped cars.

 

If they insist on Safety car crap then close pit exit on issuing yellow flags.

Edited by WOT, 10 April 2023 - 08:30.

[Stephane]

VSC for me, with pitlane closed. But a real speed limited VSC, not the delta per minisector we have now

[RedRabbit]

What lottery during the races? Virtually every season for the last decade has had predictable finishes.

It's the absolute lack of different race winners that's causing Liberty Media to encourage the FIA into "competition cautions" like SC and red flags.

[B Squared]

 (red flag only if there's like a track blocking pileup at Monaco or something, or Grosjean incident)

 

No red flags ever again since he no longer is in the series. 

[PlatenGlass]

VSC obviously works really well right now. In this regard.

 

I'll advocate for using the delta time system to restore gaps after anything that neutralises the race and bunched everyone together. It takes one lap to restore the gaps using this method, and the "lottery" will be entirely removed.

 

I would go along with this general line of thinking. I think with the VSC (and under the safety car before everyone's bunched up), I might also do something like reduce the speed limit in the pitlane to negate the advantage of pitting. I think banning pitstops is too extreme.

 

But yes, after a safety car or red flag, I would want to restore the gaps to how they were.

 

And while I also wouldn't want to ban repairing cars/changing tyres under a red flag, I think any modifications should be formally timed and added to the delta perhaps with standardised pitlane driving times added to the actual stop time.

 

I definitely do not like aggregate times, and I'm also against them for 5-second penalties to be taken after the final pitstop. But that's an aside.

 

I know some people have said that they are against this entire line of thinking because races have become too processional and they need the lottery aspect, but I think this is the wrong way to go about it. We need to look at ways of making races more competitive in general without artificially taking away people's leads.

[Red5ive]

Cant be that much of a lottery if Red Bull are winning every race........

[Autodromo]

I would be happier if they disallowed any work on the cars during a red flag and if they closed the pit lane during yellows. 

[jjcale]

Why would you want to do that? [Edit - reduce the lottery nature of F1 I mean...]

 

We need more unpredictability ... not less. 

 

Its harsh on the competitors that loose out by bad luck ... but luck tends to balance out over time. 

Edited by jjcale, 10 April 2023 - 12:17.

[revmeister]

So pardon me, I will not take part in the discussion because I'm not interested to reduce the lottery nature in F1 to the lowest possible level. It will lose a lot of appeal to me that way.

Do you find the appeal of the "lottery" in a driver randomly losing the results of their skill and hard work throughout the race, or in someone gaining an undeserved improved result?

 

Just curious...

[Nathan]

Engines blew up on such drivers all the time, same with gearboxes, wishbones, uprights, rims, electronics.  For teams, many a driver have put a good result in the barriers or another car.  So, nothing new, par for the course.

I don't want to reduce it.  Formula-1 is so predictable.  I really don't see how the word 'lottery' can be applied to Formula 1.  

Edited by Nathan, 10 April 2023 - 12:34.

[Risil]

I'm up for a bit of random misfortune and unpredictability but the perception of arbitrariness is fatal. I want to feel there's a good reason, fair or not, that somebody was screwed and somebody else was raised to victory.

Hungary 2021 is the best example of some really unfair lottery aspects contributing to a classic because the weird randomness was on the level and the result of mistakes and weird combinations of events.

[IrvTheSwerve]

As much as VSC can be a fairer option, I really dislike it. I find it a massive bore and anti-climax. I would much rather a full SC, bunching the pack up and creating some different strategies. The problem is that SCs now are so common.

[Ali623]

I personally feel F1 is far too predictable these days, so much so that we’re seeing race control try to ‘spice it up’, just look at Australia.

Luck has always been a part of F1, if you get screwed by a safety car or red flag, or get lucky, that’s just part of it. Usually it eventually balances out anyway.

[PlatenGlass]

I'm up for a bit of random misfortune and unpredictability but the perception of arbitrariness is fatal.

I think this is key. If it happens to start raining just after someone's pitted for new slicks or if their engine goes then it's just bad luck. But if someone makes a decision to bring out a safety car when they could equally have called a VSC it has a very different feel to it.

And for the integrity of the sport, human-induced lottery aspects should be removed wherever possible. It's not just about entertainment. The entertainment should come from the fact that you are watching a serious competition.

[Rediscoveryx]

Its harsh on the competitors that loose out by bad luck ... but luck tends to balance out over time.

The way I see it; we have more than 20 races per year. We already know that Red Bull has produced the best car and that Max Verstappen almost certainly is the best driver. If he loses a handful of races due to random occurances, that’s only a good thing. It will in no way jeopardize his championship.

The ”let’s reduce randomness” trope would be way more persuasive if the calendar consisted of 10 races or so. Now there are so many races that good luck and bad luck will even out in the championship, but at least some randomness will keep the individual races interesting.

[JHSingo]

Cant be that much of a lottery if Red Bull are winning every race........

 

Quite, and additionally, by removing any potential scenarios that could on occasion trip them up (or at least, make it a bit harder for them to win), they'll likely be winning even easier, and by far greater margins too. But hey, at least it'd be "fair"... 

 

I think often, suggestions like this come from personal frustration - e.g. "my driver got screwed/a driver I don't like was the beneficiary...so the rules MUST be changed so it can't happen again". But, as another poster pointed out, over a season "luck" tends to even out anyway. 

 

 

I'm a traditionalist (from waaaaay back). Once they sort out the "cheese" tyre issue, I believe "slow zones" (no safety car) are the answer (with a proviso of equality that the whole field has to go through the slow zone). Electronically slow them down to "walking speed" through a crash site mini-sector and then continue to race around the rest of the circuit. If there is a delayed "clean-up" process, then red flag with a rolling start and aggregate times.

 

Red flag: 

1. Any repair work must be taken back into the garage and the repaired car released at the back of the field.

2. Teams have telemetry to see if a tyre has been punctured by red flag debris, a similarly aged tyre can be replaced on pit road.

3. No unlapping of lapped cars.

 

If they insist on Safety car crap then close pit exit on issuing yellow flags.

 

 

I say this respectfully, but perhaps you should begin following sim racing, as it probably fulfils all your criteria?

 

On something like iRacing, there's generally no pesky safety cars (unless it's an oval-based series), no risk of inclement weather, and in the virtual world, there's no chance of competitors ever suffering from a sudden race-ending engine problem etc. 

 

It's all a lot fairer than real world motorsport can ever hope to be, but my word is it dull to watch. 

[Stephane]

But that is racing. The appeal is not in the randomness but in the technical and skill challenge.

[Anderis]

Do you find the appeal of the "lottery" in a driver randomly losing the results of their skill and hard work throughout the race, or in someone gaining an undeserved improved result?

 

Just curious...

I think I explained myself pretty well in my previous post. The appeal of lottery is not about someone being deserving or undeserving but in that you don't know what's going to happen until the very end and that from time to time, there happen things that you wouldn't have imagined being possible.

 

But that is racing. The appeal is not in the randomness but in the technical and skill challenge.

The appeal is what it actually is for each person individually, not what one random person feels it should be for all others.

[djparky]

"lottery nature"??? F1 is as predictable as the tides, you know who is going to win every week, 90% of the time the same old faces on the podium

on those rare occasions when something random happens, its hardly a lottery. Red flags, safety cars etc are part of it and the teams/ drivers know this and have to adjust. right now if RBR got hosed by a safety car they are 2 seconds a lap quicker than all bar the Mercedes- where the advantage if pushed is probably 3/4s a second a lap- they'd overtake the entire field anyway but at least it would be less boring than running around miles in front

[Jellyfishcake]

Out of all the motorsport I watch, I'd say F1 is the least lottery of the lot

 

Even ignoring the winner, you can tell where most drivers/cars will be each week there or thereabouts, and even with a 'lottery' safetycar/red flag call it doesn't change things that much really.

[Anja]

"lottery nature"??? F1 is as predictable as the tides, you know who is going to win every week, 90% of the time the same old faces on the podium

on those rare occasions when something random happens, its hardly a lottery. Red flags, safety cars etc are part of it and the teams/ drivers know this and have to adjust. right now if RBR got hosed by a safety car they are 2 seconds a lap quicker than all bar the Mercedes- where the advantage if pushed is probably 3/4s a second a lap- they'd overtake the entire field anyway but at least it would be less boring than running around miles in front

 

I think the current predictability is precisely what makes the "lottery" races stick out more nowadays. 

Edited by Anja, 10 April 2023 - 15:12.

[Cornholio]

I'd say there's a lack of "old school" lottery, which means technical retirements or wet weather retirements caused by spin-offs into the gravel trap and crashes. Both are very rare nowadays. Reliability is so good that often we have races with zero technical retirements, something that was completely unheard of 20 years ago. And wet racing really doesn't happen, because if there's a single spin or crash, it's instant red flag. So no real chance for lottery like 20 years ago.

 

Instead we have this artificial lottery created by randomness of the race director's calls for VSC/SC/Red-flag and randomness of stewards' decisions for penalties. Ironically, over 20 years ago those were predictable things: race director would only bring out the SC for huge accidents, and red flag was really never used, even when a driver was injured (Ralf Indy '04, Kubica Canada '07). And the penalty was Stop-and-Go for nearly all situations.

 

So, I'd give more chances for natural randomness and try to limit decision-based lottery by FIA.

 

I wanted to pick this out because while what you say its true, natural reliability/consistency has increased over the years, it's also the case that for non-terminal issues suffered by front running drivers, the increasingly more frequent SC/red flag situations actually lead to more predictability, not less. Verstappen at Saudi is the most recent example I can think of, there was Hamilton getting an entire lap back at Imola the other year (and he was far from the first driver to be given such a free hit like this).

 

I also happen to have recently re-watched the 2007 German European GP. I know he later retired anyway, and the downpour and T1 pile up was probably a case of a race interruption actually being justified, but I'd have loved to have seen the scenario where Winkelhock's Spyker retained its 30+ second lead when it resumed.

 

At the risk of retreading my drunken ramble from the WEC thread, my main issue isn't that I actually want more predictability, more than when I'm taking the time to watch something, I don't like having the bulk of what I've been watching beyond the raw running order rendered instantly irrelevant, or in the case of a red flag any developing strategy story lines also thrown in the bin. It probably doesn't help framing it as a sport vs entertainment debate either, nobody watches a sport with the intention of being bored stiff, more about what different people find entertaining and interesting.

 

The problem is when only one of those views is considered valid and everyone else is (incorrectly) thought to be just stubbornly holding on to fairness/sporting integrity/purity for its own sake rather than because that's what they enjoy, we end up in the position where these sort of external race manipulations are seen as a good thing rather than at best a necessary evil... well sorry to bring this race up, but it's under those conditions that they felt empowered, or maybe even compelled, to take it a step further and not just alter the rules, but break them in real time in the last race of 2021.

[ANF]

60/80 km/h slow zones may not be totally fair every time, but they ensure that racing can continue on other parts of the circuit while a car is recovered. I watched the Super Formula race today and the race was interrupted by the safety car for eleven minutes because one car had spun and stopped in one corner. These full course interruptions are incredibly boring to watch and they appear in almost every race in almost every racing series.

In case you're not familiar with slow zones, here are three examples from last year's 24 hours of Le Mans:

1. https://youtu.be/YwpQgDLPV58?t=8083
2. https://youtu.be/YwpQgDLPV58?t=22603
3. https://youtu.be/YwpQgDLPV58?t=27643

But no system is perfect. Here's a remarkably slow deployment of a slow zone for debris later in the race, and in this case with so many marshals on the track, I think there should have been a 60 rather than an 80 km/h zone. https://youtu.be/oI7xh_ceqSk?t=17990

Finally, here's a long period with several slow zones around the circuit: https://youtu.be/T540PZ-XAfg?t=2193

Still better than watching safety cars breeding safety cars.

[Ruusperi]

In case you're not familiar with slow zones, here are three examples from last year's 24 hours of Le Mans:

What's odd is that slow zones haven't even been discussed AFAIK.

Given that Eduardo Freitas acted as a race director last year, you would think he would have propagated this idea: "Hey, I have a 10-year experience of slow zones in WEC. Why not let F1 try them?"

 

People say that F1 tyres' operation temperature won't suit for slow zones. Is that a fact? When in 2025 F1 may get a new tyre supplier, could they require tyres that allow slow-zone speeds without issues?

[Stephane]

Slow Zones are good at Le Mans because the track is 13km long. F1 tracks are too short for this.

[absinthedude]

Safety car, red flag....whatever method you use.....win some, lose some. What's actually wrong with that?

[ARTGP]

Safety car, red flag....whatever method you use.....win some, lose some. What's actually wrong with that?

 

There's nothing wrong with it. It's the over-use that's the problem. It kills the DNA of grand prix racing when you are just using them on purpose. It's one thing when it happens infrequently, and you just get on with it and take the hard luck on the chin. It's another thing when every single race weekend you just build your strategy around what tire you want to be on for the last red flag...Most of the laps of the GP and qualifying become pointless by design. That has never been F1. 

Edited by ARTGP, 10 April 2023 - 18:03.

[Ruusperi]

Slow Zones are good at Le Mans because the track is 13km long. F1 tracks are too short for this.

Slow zones are 300 to 500 metres long at Le Mans. In other words, even Monaco could be divided into 10 slow zones.

https://www.24h-lema...ng-system-20851

[ANF]

Slow zones are 300 to 500 metres long at Le Mans. In other words, even Monaco could be divided into 10 slow zones.
https://www.24h-lema...ng-system-20851

They currently have 9 zones at Le Mans, not 35, so most zones must have been merged into longer ones. Current map: https://i.ibb.co/3hx.../lemans2022.png This is probably because of accidents that happened in the first year(s) of slow zones, like this one https://youtu.be/E4ygNHOqVQc before they realised it was a bad idea to have the zones begin at a point where cars would normally do 300+ km/h. [Edit: I'm actually not sure if that accident occured at a slow zone or if it was just a car not wanting to overtake a slow car under yellow flags.]

But I actually think it should be possible to divide Monaco into seven zones like this?

Edited by ANF, 10 April 2023 - 19:27.

[absinthedude]

There's nothing wrong with it. It's the over-use that's the problem. It kills the DNA of grand prix racing when you are just using them on purpose. It's one thing when it happens infrequently, and you just get on with it and take the hard luck on the chin. It's another thing when every single race weekend you just build your strategy around what tire you want to be on for the last red flag...Most of the laps of the GP and qualifying become pointless by design. That has never been F1. 

 

Ah to be fair to all, I haven't watched any F1 this year. So I don't know if this has become more of a problem. There were a lot of red flags in 2020/21 which many, including myself, put down to Covid restricting how marshals could work. But last year that made less sense. Regarding this year, I don't know. There is a possibility that Liberty/FOM have put pressure on the FIA and it's officials to "spice up the show"....in which case it matters not what method of stopping and restarting races is chosen....they'll use it to "spice up the show"

[pdac]

If you want randomness, why not have each car/driver combination pick a ticket, before the race, to decide how much extra ballast they have to carry. I wouldn't advocate that. But if you want random allocation of misfortune, you can't say that one approach is better or more desirable than any other. I don't want randomness. I want to see the best car/driver combination on the day cruise to victory. That's what racing is about - the best winning because they are the best.

[balmybaldwin]

I would imagine this runs the risk of further incidents occuring whilst the original is being sorted.

Also leaves the opportunity for drivers to accidently be dicing competitively and trying to remain close through a yellow flag area with marshals on track and all the safety concerns that come with that.

I'm only suggesting slow zones to replace the vsc - they don't use the VSC for marchalls on track  there would still be the option of a safety car if the field needed to be bunched or better controlled

[jonpollak]

Just watch INDYCAR and let F1 do whatever BS they need to so the FIA / FOM and Liberty Biberty can justify their horseschitt jobs.

Jp

[TomNokoe]

1. Stop the red flags. This doesn't warrant further explanation because it is so egregious.

2. A grand prix should have one standing start only - the start!! Diluting the anticipation, tension and sanctity of this singular moment is wrong.

3. Start utilising the VSC properly. At the moment it appears the SC is favoured over the VSC because the drivers can't be trusted not to either 1. kill a marshall or 2. kill themselves during recovery operations. This is excessive from the FIA and outside of poor visibility has an unfathomably low probability that it simply does not justify disrupting race after race with the full SC or red flag.

4. Carrying on from point 3, close the pits under VSC. There is no sporting reason why it should be allowed outside of exceptional car damage. If you need to pit, simply wait for the green flag in a few laps time. Otherwise, there should be no reason why you cannot circulate at reduced speed whilst the race remains neutralised.

5. Only release the full SC for serious accidents and debris requiring very strict speed adherence and race management. The full SC needs to be overhauled as it currently takes far too long to pick up the leader, close the train and then release lapped cars. This used to be much quicker in years gone by so I only put it down to risk-averse deltas and policies. Just close the pack up and get on with it.

6. During full SC, only open the pits once the train is formed. I believe it is less unfair to disadvantage the cars who haven't pitted, as they actively chose not to pit under green conditions. This is similar to how Indycar operates and has a very simple and easy-to-understand risk/reward dynamic for both the teams and the audience. Currently this dynamic is completely backwards, as it is the cars that choose to pit under green conditions that are at risk. As noted in point 3, if the VSC+closed pits is used more frequently, this becomes much less of an issue anyway.

7. Penalise drivers who stop their cars in difficult-to-recover spots. A prime example is Magnussen at Baku last year. He had an escape road directly ahead but instead stopped at the side of the track. Recovery areas should be clearly marked on the track map and discussed during the drivers briefing. Those who do not follow these instructions should be reprimanded or penalised. Usual rules around force majeure apply.

I don't like slow zones in F1. The margins are too tight. They work better in endurance because the lap-by-lap racing is more relaxed compared to F1's sprint nature. They work well at Le Mans because the circuit is so long. Plus, there are many instances where driver A hits the slow zone once, and driver B twice. As a tool, VSC is much simpler, fairer and more reliable, even if it is slightly more disruptive.

I also think many of you overestimate F1's capability to develop software to work in tandem with the VSC to resume races after red flags with the previous gaps, despite how simple it sounds on paper. Anyway, this idea is solving a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place, as we need to stop the red flags at source.

I strongly disagree with those who think this contrived unpredictability adds to the show. I also completely loathe the words "that's racing". It has reached a point where a meteor could hit the track and some quarters would shrug and utter this nonsense catchphrase. Free pitstops, multiple restarts and endless crashing is not racing.

Edited by TomNokoe, 10 April 2023 - 23:16.

[Primo]

Apart from the standing restart, I think that the current rules are okay but the implementation is not. RC seem to be way too cautios, way to quick to deploy SC and wave the red flag. 
Standing restarts creates a lottery though, especially late in the race since it will be, for many, an irresistible temptation to gamble a bit. I'd say standing restart only if theres a red flag at first lap,

[WOT]

I say this respectfully, but perhaps you should begin following sim racing, as it probably fulfils all your criteria?

 

On something like iRacing, there's generally no pesky safety cars (unless it's an oval-based series), no risk of inclement weather, and in the virtual world, there's no chance of competitors ever suffering from a sudden race-ending engine problem etc. 

 

It's all a lot fairer than real world motorsport can ever hope to be, but my word is it dull to watch. 

 

Thanks for your thoughts, never watched iRacing, not my thing, but from your description, respectfully, I don't see how that equates to my vision of F1. As I said, I'm a traditionalist and I live in hope (I'm also a hopeless optimist) that the pinnacle of MotorSport will regain some form of sanity and continuity and one day return to a competitive sporting model where we can have full grids and anyone can win, rather than being a business model. All I want is fair competition.

 

Accidents and their clean-up will always remain an issue because most accidents present vastly different circumstances, there's no predicting the result with complete accuracy. How to handle that to the best result is what needs work, and that's what needs discussion.

 

I've followed the "sport" long enough to know that re luck, generally what goes around comes around. But that's what the title of the thread is about, reducing those odds.

[gillesfan76]

Maybe we just need to decide what the majority of us want and stick to it instead of flip flopping between alternating view points simply because what we previously wanted, now doesn’t suit our favourite team or driver (or alternatively suits Mercedes/Lewis or Red Bull/Max because some people dislike them).

 

When Mercedes and Lewis were dominating, people wanted larger elements of chance to reduce the number of their wins. We had far too many people, some supposedly reasonable even, claiming that AD 2021 which was a lottery combined with disregard of the rules, the worst combination for sporting integrity, was somehow all ok.

 

Now we have Red Bull and Max dominating, and one race where George was leading in the now not-dominant Mercedes, his lead taken away in a lottery and now suddenly threads popping up about how to reduce the lottery.

 

If we want sporting integrity and value that as the overarching principle of sport, then we must stick with the position that removing or at least reducing the lottery as far as practicable and following the rules, shall be held above all else.

 

But if we just want a show, a veritable circus, then we must stick with the position of having SC lotteries and inconsistent stewarding, rules disregarded etc. because the entertainment of the circus, clowns and all is the most important.

 

Each person has a right to their preferred position, but they should stick to it instead of flip flopping between the two depending on which way the wind is blowing towards their favourite team/driver or their disliked team/driver.