43 replies to this topic

[statsguy]

It's long been accepted that if you're not cheating in F1, you're not trying hard enough.

And we've historically seen a lot of "rule bending".

E.g. Ferrari engine-gate, Merc illegal rear wing, Merc oil burning, Merc suspensions, Red Bull alleged TC, Beneton alleged TC, Renault launch control, Renault mass dampers, Honda second fuel tank, Many flexi wings  scandals... have I missed any amusing ones?

But in recent years, teams haven't been caught doing anything dodgy, which seems quite odd.

It's unrealistic that at least one team hasn't been found using a substantial performance gain by bending the rules in the last 5-ish years since Ferrari's engine scandal that got hushed up behind closed doors.

Any thoughts on why that might be?

[Laptom]

I would call cheating a bit too far, but more examine the boudary of the rules   .

This is also part of the sport in my opinion, where technical developments are key. The problem is that we have seen more and more standardizing and together with the controls before, during and after the season or races, things are getting complicated to stretch the rules. 

By GPS, every team knows how many HP the engines have, what the weak and strong type of corners a car have, etc. If there is any bending of the rules, it will be found swifly by the teams itself, or the FIA.

[LolaB0860]

They're busy enough cheating in NASCAR, IMSA and IndyCar nowadays. Where they'll get motherly slap in the wrist for doing so, too.

And yes I wouldn't call the traditional "loophole finding" you've seen in F1 cheating. Cheating is something blatant you do in secret and hope no-one finds out, and then act all surprised when it's found out. The Ferrari engine scandal was obviously that

Edited by LolaB0860, 04 June 2024 - 05:51.

[lewislorenzo]

Breaking the cost cap in 2022…

[TauriJ]

I dunno why but I thought this thread was about drivers wifes...

[Beri]

Breaking the cost cap in 2022…

How surprising.

[pacificquay]

Better scrutineering, having to openly declare upgrades etc makes it more likely to be picked up now.

 

The cars are probably the most legit they’ve been in history.

[absinthedude]

It's long been accepted that if you're not cheating in F1, you're not trying hard enough.

 

 

Has it?

 

Colin Chapman used to refer to "finding the unfair advantage"....by which he didn't mean out and out cheating, but he meant technical innovation that other teams hadn't even thought of....and which the rule makers had not yet thought of. He'd have loved 1992 with all the "driver aids". But none of that was cheating. Benetton probably had illegal software, at a point in time when the FIA hadn't caught up with the rapidly expanding role of computers in controlling aspects of the car. 

 

I doubt we'll often get illegal engines, illegal software, illegal fuel and such things from the past because it's much more likely to be spotted these days. What we will get, undoubtedly, is creative ways to work within the letter of the budget cap, while perhaps not always within the spirit of it. 

[pdac]

I don't think it's really worth it these days. There was once a time when a team might come up with something that would give them a distinct advantage and it would take others a good while to copy. Now, if any team comes up with something like that, there is a TD issued within a couple of races and it's gone. The costs are not justifiable anymore and also the rules are much tighter that so much is now specified to the point where there are very few, if any, alternative interpretations. I doubt you'll ever see an F-duct type innovation again.

[PayasYouRace]

Only one team has had a substantial performance advantage recently. Yet that seems to have eroded this year.

I think the last few posts hit the nail on the head. It’s just not worth it with the current rules, which are very restrictive and have the cars examined closer than ever.

[Nemo1965]

Has it?

Colin Chapman used to refer to "finding the unfair advantage"....by which he didn't mean out and out cheating, but he meant technical innovation that other teams hadn't even thought of....and which the rule makers had not yet thought of. He'd have loved 1992 with all the "driver aids". But none of that was cheating. Benetton probably had illegal software, at a point in time when the FIA hadn't caught up with the rapidly expanding role of computers in controlling aspects of the car.

I doubt we'll often get illegal engines, illegal software, illegal fuel and such things from the past because it's much more likely to be spotted these days. What we will get, undoubtedly, is creative ways to work within the letter of the budget cap, while perhaps not always within the spirit of it.

Wasn’t that Mark Donohue? (Using the expression Unfair Advantage). I can’t remember Chapman ever using the expression but I am willing to be corrected?

Edit: name corrected. Zut!

Edited by Nemo1965, 04 June 2024 - 19:26.

[Collombin]

The cars are probably the most legit they’ve been in history.

Though the counter argument would be that in the days of far fewer rules, there were far fewer that could be broken.

After F1 scrapped the fuel rules (1949?, until they came back in 1958), what performance limiting rules could have been broken apart from running an oversize engine? (I know they could check that, without knowing the specifics of how or how often).

[F1Frog]

Though the counter argument would be that in the days of far fewer rules, there were far fewer that could be broken.

After F1 scrapped the fuel rules (1949?, until they came back in 1958), what performance limiting rules could have been broken apart from running an oversize engine? (I know they could check that, without knowing the specifics of how or how often).

You could sneak a different driver into your car wearing the original driver’s helmet as a ‘disguise’.

[Collombin]

You could sneak a different driver into your car wearing the original driver’s helmet as a ‘disguise’.

Did they paint a moustache on too, I've only ever seen Behra clean shaven?

[SenorSjon]

Breaking the cost cap in 2022…

 

It was 2021, so acceptance has set in.

[B Squared]

Wasn’t that Mark Donahue? (Using the expression Unfair Advantage). I can’t remember Chapman ever using the expression but I am willing to be corrected?

Yes, Donohue's expression, and the name of his book. The most often misspelled name in motorsports.

[Laptom]

Breaking the cost cap in 2022…

 

That was 2021, when Lewis and Bottas crashed some cars from RedBul which was in the cost cap...

[PayasYouRace]

The most often misspelled name in motorsports.

Now there’s an idea for a thread.

[IrvTheSwerve]

*cough*Horner*cough*

[absinthedude]

Yes, Donohue's expression, and the name of his book. The most often misspelled name in motorsports.

 

Russ Brown

 

Honestly I've heard it attributed to Chapman, but it is the title of Donohue's book. 

[PayasYouRace]

Russ Brown

Honestly I've heard it attributed to Chapman, but it is the title of Donohue's book.

I’d imagine that it was quite a common phrase amongst the racing world, specially between those who were known for pushing to the very edges of the rule book at a time when there was room for lots of innovation.

[PlatenGlass]

Yes, Donohue's expression, and the name of his book. The most often misspelled name in motorsports.

Judging by this forum it's George Russell (often spelt Russel).

[B Squared]

No mention of Colin Chapman in this old thread:

https://forums.autos...fair-advantage/

Edited by B Squared, 04 June 2024 - 11:01.

[PayasYouRace]

No mention of Colin Chapman in this old thread:

https://forums.autos...fair-advantage/

I wouldn’t expect to, given it’s a review of Donohue’s book.

[B Squared]

Google "who coined the phrase unfair advantage" it comes up Penske Donohue

[B Squared]

I wouldn’t expect to, given it’s a review of Donohue’s book.

Well wouldn't you think that if Colin Chapman coined this phrase that Donohue would have been eviscerated for it at the time the book came out? Please let's not rewrite history, Chapman has plenty of credits, we don't need to make them up.

[pacificquay]

Well wouldn't you think that if Colin Chapman coined this phrase that Donohue would have been eviscerated for it at the time the book came out? Please let's not rewrite history, Chapman has plenty of credits, we don't need to make them up.

 

Absinthe only claimed that Chapman said it, he did not say that Chapman originated it.

[B Squared]

I wouldn’t expect to, given it’s a review of Donohue’s book.

I'll add that even though it is a book review on Mark's story, you don't think that if Chapman had been the one that came up with that phrase that that wouldn't have been mentioned within the thread and that Donohue would have been lambasted for using the phrase?

[Clatter]

I suspect the budget cap will stop teams from trying to exploit some of the on the edge things. They can't really afford to spend their budget, computer time etc on something that may well get banned very quickly.

[pacificquay]

I'll add that even though it is a book review on Mark's story, you don't think that if Chapman had been the one that came up with that phrase that that wouldn't have been mentioned within the thread and that Donohue would have been lambasted for using the phrase?

 

Again, no-one is claiming Chapman came up with it, but a cursory google finds multiple references to him having used it.

[PayasYouRace]

Google "who coined the phrase unfair advantage" it comes up Penske Donohue

OK



Didn’t quite work, that. Maybe we can write to Mssrs Brin and Page?

I’m happy to credit Donohue and Penske for popularising the mantra, but it’s far too common a phrase to give them credit for coining it. It also very much sums up the Chapman ethos, and it’s not like you prove he never said it himself.

[B Squared]

From everything I've seen and heard of Chapman, his favorite phrase was "bloody hell"

[Risil]

Finding out who first said a common phrase is really difficult, often impossible. In Donohue's book does he introduce the term as if he's invented it or does he explain it as if an informed reader might have heard it before? That's where I'd start.

[B Squared]

From the books jacket:

All of Mark Donohue's wins can be credited to an "Unfair Advantage" in the car, it's preparation, team strategy, or the driver himself. Here Donohue tells what the winning secrets are."

I also remember when Penske was affiliated with Sears Roebuck automotive back in the day and the ads had the words "Penske's unfair" and also if I remember correctly "Penske's advantage"

[New Britain]

As an amateur, I used to drive one of the team cars for a highly-respected builder and team principal. He's a first class man with an international reputation.

 

Once during a practice I was standing next to him along the pit-wall. One of our other cars, driven by a factory professional, was coming down the straight but as it did so it was overtaken by a rival in 'car X'.

As we watched this unfold, the team principal said to me, '"Car X" is illegal'.

Perplexed as to how he could be so sure, I asked, 'How do you know that "car X" is illegal?'

'Because', he replied, 'it is faster than my car, and my car is illegal.'

[basimi]

As an amateur, I used to drive one of the team cars for a highly-respected builder and team principal. He's a first class man with an international reputation.

Once during a practice I was standing next to him along the pit-wall. One of our other cars, driven by a factory professional, was coming down the straight but as it did so it was overtaken by a rival in 'car X'.
As we watched this unfold, the team principal said to me, '"Car X" is illegal'.
Perplexed as to how he could be so sure, I asked, 'How do you know that "car X" is illegal?'
'Because', he replied, 'it is faster than my car, and my car is illegal.'

That's a great story 🤣

[JacnGille]

Judging by this forum it's George Russell (often spelt Russel).

McLaren with two "c"s is not far behind. 

McClaren

[NotAPineapple]

These days it would be suicidal for a team to cheat. All of your corporate sponsors have compliance, legal & marketing departments who will band together to destroy you if their name is associated with a blatant cheater.

At best your sponsors will leave. At worst they may sue for reputational damage through non compliance and breach of contract.

Theres simply too much money on the line to risk it.

Hell, with todays complicated technicaln sporting and financial regulations it's hard enough to stay compliant without even trying to actively cheat.

[F1 Mike]

These days it would be suicidal for a team to cheat. All of your corporate sponsors have compliance, legal & marketing departments who will band together to destroy you if their name is associated with a blatant cheater.

At best your sponsors will leave. At worst they may sue for reputational damage through non compliance and breach of contract.

Theres simply too much money on the line to risk it.

Hell, with todays complicated technicaln sporting and financial regulations it's hard enough to stay compliant without even trying to actively cheat.

And yet... Ferrari and their naughty engine

[jimjimjeroo]

theres a lot of engineering moves currently, wouldnt surprise me if there was a lot of IP transfer, this may generate scandal in the next year or two

[Beri]

theres a lot of engineering moves currently, wouldnt surprise me if there was a lot of IP transfer, this may generate scandal in the next year or two

 

IP is such a broad term. When does an idea or a design direction become an IP? I dont think there will be a Xerox spewing out designs and IPs like with the Coughlan/Stepney situation.

[chrcol]

I don't think it's really worth it these days. There was once a time when a team might come up with something that would give them a distinct advantage and it would take others a good while to copy. Now, if any team comes up with something like that, there is a TD issued within a couple of races and it's gone. The costs are not justifiable anymore and also the rules are much tighter that so much is now specified to the point where there are very few, if any, alternative interpretations. I doubt you'll ever see an F-duct type innovation again.

Yep, F1 is too anti innovation now.

[Clatter]

theres a lot of engineering moves currently, wouldnt surprise me if there was a lot of IP transfer, this may generate scandal in the next year or two

Engineering moves have happened all the time.

[Brian60]

You could sneak a different driver into your car wearing the original driver’s helmet as a ‘disguise’.

This happened in 500cc Grand Prix in the 1970's. According to Steve Parrish's biography, he was sent out in Barry Sheenes leathers and on his bike to qualify for him, because Barry was late getting to the track. He qualified Sheene's bike several places higher than he managed on his own, even though they were identical!