89 replies to this topic

[Mat13]

Don’t hate me…

But I really enjoyed that race, and I think mostly that was because we were watching the cars actually being at the limit (and past Sargeants). Do we need to see more of this?

[Beri]

Answer to the question; Yes.

[Scotracer]

Just make them use all 3 compounds in a race. Done.

[registered]

No the teams just need to be willing to take more risks instead of everyone sticking to a safe strategy. Aggressive strategies must be worth it at least sometimes

[Calum]

Don’t start this chat.

Remember we had one exceptionally interesting Canada and it brought in the cheese tyre era?

This wasn’t exciting enough to cause an overreaction of increased mandated tyre windows.

[PlatenGlass]

No. It would be ridiculous. F1 is getting more and more circumscribed and it's not a good thing.

[ConsiderAndGo]

No.

[ARTGP]

Don’t hate me…

But I really enjoyed that race, and I think mostly that was because we were watching the cars actually being at the limit (and past Sargeants). Do we need to see more of this?

 

No this race was more than that. Teams didn't know about the rule which is what created the various stint lengths since many had already used up tires they didn't know they needed to save.

 

If teams know about it ahead of time, everyone is going to save tires during free practice and stop on the same laps in the race. 

Edited by ARTGP, 08 October 2023 - 18:48.

[Mat13]

No this race was more than that. Teams didn't know about the rule which is what created the various stint lengths since many had already used up tires they didn't know they needed to save.

If teams know about it ahead of time, everyone is going to stop on the same lap.

It’s more about the drivers actually being able to push the whole race, as they have to stop before worrying about the tyre life. This race felt like they actually were using all they had (except for Max, who was still managing )

[PayasYouRace]

I think this race would have been pretty good without mandated pit windows anyway. Modern F1 just really works at fast circuits.

[Massa]

Don’t start this chat.

Remember we had one exceptionally interesting Canada and it brought in the cheese tyre era?

This wasn’t exciting enough to cause an overreaction of increased mandated tyre windows.

It's exceptionnal, they NEVER learn .

[JeePee]

Was this the best race this season?

No.

[Stephane]

It never works when you try to recreate artificially something that happen accidentally

[PlatenGlass]

I don't think this race was made any better by the maximimum stint length. Took away strategic options. Made it more predictable if anything.

The race that caused the cheese tyres (Canada 2010) was at least a much better race than this one so more of an "excuse" (though still a poor excuse).

[F1 Mike]

No no no. If you want sprint stints and maximum attack, bring back refuelling.

[Victor]

No. The strategic part of the a race is important and adds value to the races. A GP should not just be a sprint from the first to the last lap.

I found the tyre limit of 18 laps confusing as I could not know during the whole race which tyres each driver had and which he was still supposed to use.

[Disgrace]

No no no. If you want sprint stints and maximum attack, bring back refuelling.

 

Not necessarily the worst idea...

[jwill189]

Not necessarily the worst idea...

 

Until a pit lane fire erupts again.

[ARTGP]

Until a pit lane fire erupts again.

 

Maybe, but Indycar, Nascar, Le Mans all refuel without fires. 

[SenorSjon]

By tomorrow, I've forgotten this race happened. So hell no.

[Laster]

Answering the title - No.

The tyres we have now happened because of the Canadian grand prix where the tyres degraded and fell to pieces. It created an unpredictable and entertaining race - because the teams were suddenly caught off guard and had no optimal way of dealing with it. Bernie then decided this was wonderful and so decided degrading tyres was the way to go. Early on with Pirelli we had a great season in 2012 while teams learned how to adapt to these tyres, and eventually they did adapt. Unpredictably went out the window and we were left with pretty much what we’ve had for the past decade.

Mandatory pitstops might create an element of unpredictably in the short term but the teams will inevitably adapt and remove that unpredictably. Worse such things usually end up penalising the midfield as they end up using more tyres in qualifying, creating a wider gap between them and those at the front.

[muelte]

Big no

[Gravelngrass]

Sounds tempting in an era where racing in F1 is broken. But what they should really do is fix the cars, tyres, rules to allow good races to happen naturally. The sprint yesterday was a case for no pit stops and, maybe, shorter races. Bottom line fans want to see racing, not conserving. These should be cars, conceived and made for the exclusive purpose of racing. Testing and developing stuff for supposed road and transportation relevance, marketing and PR for auto brands and an impossible marriage of racing and conservationism are not F1 and should never have been. It's time to make this a dedicated racing spectacle and separate it from all the rest. 

[PayasYouRace]

Maybe, but Indycar, Nascar, Le Mans all refuel without fires. 

 

Not always. I doubt you'd find whether F1 was any particular outlier in terms of pitlane fires.

 

Refuelling was bad for what it did to race strategy. It ruined it. Unless you mandate very small fuel tanks like the series you mention, the strategy becomes a foregone conclusion.

[AustinF1]

No.

[JimmyClark]

I didn't really enjoy the race, because I knew the gaps were artificial and stops were coming. There was no option for them to take a risk and stay out.

Mandatory stops will just mean lots of pit overtakes like the old days of refuelling.

[Baddoer]

Oh for god sake please no.

Kill it with fire.

[Aaaarrgghh]

No. In fact, you shouldn't even have to make a pit stop.

[AustinF1]

Oh for god sake please no.

Kill it with fire.

Seriously, this. But we could use a tire supplier that can build a tire that's not afraid of kerbs.

[LolaB0860]

Is this a joke? Of course no.

[ANF]

Hell no! All it did was make the race very predictable. "Zhou pitted with 22 laps to go, so he will have to stop again. Bottas pitted with 18 laps to go, so he won't have to stop again."

[Carsey]

Just bring a tyre thats super soft(er) and that doesnt last as long.

 

The current tyres simply last far too long.

[AustinF1]

Just bring a tyre thats super soft(er) and that doesnt last as long.

 

The current tyres simply last far too long.

Did you see the cars running the soft tire during the sprint yesterday?

 

It seems like you didn't.

[masa90]

No. Boring, soulless artificial race. If this was the norm it would be horrible.

 

There is already too much regulating in way too many trivial stuff.

[ANF]

I'd rather see a greater variety in strategy than plenty of pit stops: non-stoppers on hards vs one-stoppers on mediums vs two-stoppers on softs.

[Carsey]

Did you see the cars running the soft tire during the sprint yesterday?

 

It seems like you didn't.

Seems like I did.

 

 

So you would rather see a race where everyone has a tyre that lasts the full length of a GP.   Everyone on the same tyre,  same strategy, no pitstops....

[pdac]

My answer is yes - they should mandate that every compound must be able to last a whole race distance and a good few laps more.

[Gravelngrass]

So you would rather see a race where everyone has a tyre that lasts the full length of a GP. Everyone on the same tyre, same strategy, no pitstops....

Exactly, what you described, maybe excluding use of the same tyre, has the highest probability of creating actual on-track racing. It works in Motogp. It could work in F1 if they did all the rest of stuff right: cars, tyres, regs…
It’s up to the stakeholders of the sport to create the ideal framework so that the best possible racing can happen. All the deviations you see today and have seen before like refueling, mandatory used of compounds, DRS, parc ferme, penalties, etc. are the result of them not having been able to and introducing gimmicks and politically motivated measures to try and patch it up or favor some party…

Edited by Gravelngrass, 08 October 2023 - 20:17.

[PlatenGlass]

My answer is yes - they should mandate that every compound must be able to last a whole race distance and a good few laps more.

I don't think F1 was any worse for not having routine pitstops before they took off in the 80s or so.

[Dmitriy_Guller]

CART tried mandatory pit windows in 2002.  They were solving a real problem they had, as too many races were won by cars that were hopeless on pace but had a free shot to steal the race by pitting under caution from the back.  Even for CART it turned out to be a mistake, and Australia 2002 couldn't be the farce that it was without mandatory pit windows.  I think it would be a bigger mistake for F1, as I don't even see a problem to be solved here.

[Clrnc]

I think this race would have been pretty good without mandated pit windows anyway. Modern F1 just really works at fast circuits.

Yes and many corners have different lines to overtake. This track is just designed very well, hopefully the FIA removes the track limits though

[SenorSjon]

They should skip the 3m wide flat kerbs.

[TomNokoe]

I have to say on a sporting level I really valued the drivers pushing every lap, I think it's worth far more than strategic autonomy.

[RedRabbit]

I didn't find the race particularly intriguing. Frenetic, yes, with a lot going on, but very little that was truly engaging, and you knew well ahead of time when a driver would stop.

The only thing it highlights is that Pirelli make garbage race tires, because F1 drivers should have the option of pushing qualifying laps the whole race if they can.

[pdac]

I don't think F1 was any worse for not having routine pitstops before they took off in the 80s or so.

 

I'm always a little dubious about looking at how things were in the past. Times have changed. Technology has changed. Attitudes have changed. But most of all, we've learned things that can not be unlearned. But yes, I don't think pit stops really add anything.

[Beri]

I loved it. Seeing drivers do qualy lap after qualy lap. It is something we haven't seen in more recent times.

[ANF]

I guess I'll have to rewatch the race because I actually didn't realise how hard they were pushing.

[noikeee]

I guess I'll have to rewatch the race because I actually didn't realise how hard they were pushing.

Yeah this is something that for the people in the cockpit it makes a huge difference, but for the people watching... uhhh... you guys could actually tell that they were pushing more than usual? I only realised it at the interviews at the end...

[w1Y]

Apart from at the front I found today's race a mess to follow.

They just need to try and get a balance with the tyre selection and make it difficult to judge whether to take an extra Pitstone of not.

Personally I would like a one race trial where there is a mystery tyre which has to be raced but the teams don't get it until the race time.

May throw up a few different strategies. Just a trial at one race though as I don't really like these types of changes but seems to be a way to get around the fact they have too much data.

Although I'm gonna guess they use it as the first or second tyre so they can adjust strategy during the race as would be too much a gamble.leaving it to the last pitstop.

And it's scary that they were all pushing hard then. Because Max wasn't and still won with ease. Not even a single track limit warning either

Edited by w1Y, 08 October 2023 - 23:54.

[JvsKVB77]

No, this decision particularly kill all strategy in the race and drivers still was  managing their tyres.