Sprint races approved and happening in 2021. Balls.

[Everso Biggyballies]

Bottom post of the previous page:

I must admit I have always disliked the "every team must use two of the three chosen tyre compounds" each race meaning they have to stop at least once even if they dont need to. I woud much rather they had the old system where there would be a choice of compounds and each car could use whatever choice of tyres they wanted. If they wanted to run one set for the whole race they could, likewise they could go for softer tyres and do multipl stops if they felt that suited their car better. Different cars use their tyres in different ways, some seem to be harder of tyres than others.

To me its nonsense and ridiculous that like Sainz recently had to stop on the last lap, not because he needed to stop, but to meet the mandate of using two different compounds. In the process of that he dropped from a decents points position out of the points and as a result come the end of the season they had fallen short of Mercedes in the WCC by three points.... the points they lost by having to stop for tyres they did not need cost them the 9 million dollars bonus that would have been theirs for coming 2nd in the WCC.

I remember also earlier in the year I think it was Ocon was going long on a set of hard tyres, hoping for a late Safety Car to bank a points position, but was forced to pit from ninth on the final lap purely to meet the requirement of making a pitstop.and using two compounds.

As he peeled into the pits, the entry was blocked by photographers, marshals and other officials, getting set up for the podium ceremony, causing him to take action to avoid hitting anyone. He had to take avoiding action. No one was injured but they could have been and certainly gave him and those he nearly hit a WTF moment.

Its just a nonsense rule. They are big boys, just let them decide what tyres they need / want out of their allocated selection, not the way the rule is.

I know this tyre rule isnt even applicable to the Sprint races where tyre choice is free and stops are not obligatory but we started talking of the tyre rule and I had to get my gripe off my chest. ( **feel better now**)

[Vassago]

I disagree, because being the faster car on a slower tyre also stops you from overtaking. And besides that there will still be the strategy of doing one stop less than the other guy. Its fine to see a car create a 20 second gal by driving the wheels off the car, if we know he needs to pit again. And maybe coming out just behind or wheel to wheel with his rival and having to overtake. That's how things were in the 90s. I'm very much into bringing back refuelling as well, and smaller fuel tanks, which means smaller cars.

In the modern era saving engine & tires is paramount. The 90s style of racing is dead. Nobody is driving 100% to create a 20 second gap for an additional pitstop anymore. Instead most teams absolutely bungle their strategy and end up waiting for a safety car or drive 98% of race distance on hard tire like Haas did one time. Complete shambles.

[Michael Ferner]

"If we'd take away the pit stops/DRS/tyre rules etc. the races would be even more processional" yada yada yada yada. I've heard it so often, I can't believe people are still buying this Bull Shit. The pit stops are the original cause for processional races, there were none before F1 pit stops became the norm in the eighties, and they were here to stay once races without pit stops were all but banned in the nineties. You don't get a better product by fixing over and over again what isn't broken. "Oh, the races have become processional, we need more pit stops to spice them up" - "Oh, they're even more processional now, we need a stronger dose: even more pit stops, different tyre compounds, how about artificial overtaking..." Once you've got your head buried deep enough in shit, you can't see clear anymore. And it won't help burying it even deeper!

[XcraigX]

"If we'd take away the pit stops/DRS/tyre rules etc. the races would be even more processional" yada yada yada yada. I've heard it so often, I can't believe people are still buying this Bull Shit. The pit stops are the original cause for processional races, there were none before F1 pit stops became the norm in the eighties, and they were here to stay once races without pit stops were all but banned in the nineties. You don't get a better product by fixing over and over again what isn't broken. "Oh, the races have become processional, we need more pit stops to spice them up" - "Oh, they're even more processional now, we need a stronger dose: even more pit stops, different tyre compounds, how about artificial overtaking..." Once you've got your head buried deep enough in shit, you can't see clear anymore. And it won't help burying it even deeper!

So let's watch one...

(Thanks Fastlane database)
Seems very processional to me. The thing that made the pre-80's races interesting was the consistent UNREALIABILITY of the cars. Something broke on every car in every race. You never knew who was going to win (or limp home as "least broken car at the end"). It was not the lack of pitstops that made the race interesting. It was whether the chap in the lead was going to make it to the end or drop out that made it interesting.
I agree that pit stops are not the answer, but taking them away won't fix it either.

F1 used to push the technology envelope so hard that the cars were designed to barely make it to the end of the race. The limits in budget and testing have now made the technology a bit more ordinary. Should we remove the barriers to technology? Prices will climb to the sky again, but we may get some of that magic back.

I don't have the answers, but pitsops, tires, and refuling are not them either.

[MonteCristo]

"If we'd take away the pit stops/DRS/tyre rules etc. the races would be even more processional" yada yada yada yada. I've heard it so often, I can't believe people are still buying this Bull Shit. The pit stops are the original cause for processional races, there were none before F1 pit stops became the norm in the eighties, and they were here to stay once races without pit stops were all but banned in the nineties. You don't get a better product by fixing over and over again what isn't broken. "Oh, the races have become processional, we need more pit stops to spice them up" - "Oh, they're even more processional now, we need a stronger dose: even more pit stops, different tyre compounds, how about artificial overtaking..." Once you've got your head buried deep enough in shit, you can't see clear anymore. And it won't help burying it even deeper!

So let's watch one...

(Thanks Fastlane database)
Seems very processional to me. The thing that made the pre-80's races interesting was the consistent UNREALIABILITY of the cars. Something broke on every car in every race. You never knew who was going to win (or limp home as "least broken car at the end"). It was not the lack of pitstops that made the race interesting. It was whether the chap in the lead was going to make it to the end or drop out that made it interesting.
I agree that pit stops are not the answer, but taking them away won't fix it either.

F1 used to push the technology envelope so hard that the cars were designed to barely make it to the end of the race. The limits in budget and testing have now made the technology a bit more ordinary. Should we remove the barriers to technology? Prices will climb to the sky again, but we may get some of that magic back.

I don't have the answers, but pitsops, tires, and refuling are not them either.

I'll say unpredictability. Reliability (or lack thereof), mixed in with generally harder to drive cars (worse track surfaces, less grippy tyres, setups not tuned to perfection), with tracks that punished errors (gravel, grass, walls, high kerbs, catch fencing).

It all made those races that much more engaging, because you didn't know what would happen, even if the on-track action was processional at times.

[Aty]

F1 used to push the technology envelope so hard that the cars were designed to barely make it to the end of the race.

Dr. Ing. h.c. Porsche used to say (paraphrasing): "The perfect race car crosses the finish line in first place and subsequently falls into its constituent parts." This kind of design philosophy could keep racing fans on the edge until very end.

[Everso Biggyballies]

F1 used to push the technology envelope so hard that the cars were designed to barely make it to the end of the race.

Dr. Ing. h.c. Porsche used to say (paraphrasing): "The perfect race car crosses the finish line in first place and subsequently falls into its constituent parts." This kind of philosophy could keep racing fans on the edge until very end.

I think you will find that was Colin Chapman said that, and certainly practiced that in his philosophy.. But whoever said it, matters not, it is what was said that strikes a chord is important.

[Aty]

F1 used to push the technology envelope so hard that the cars were designed to barely make it to the end of the race.

Dr. Ing. h.c. Porsche used to say (paraphrasing): "The perfect race car crosses the finish line in first place and subsequently falls into its constituent parts." This kind of philosophy could keep racing fans on the edge until very end.

I think you will find that was Colin Chapman said that, and certainly practiced that in his philosophy.. But whoever said it, matters not, it is what was said that strikes a chord is important.

I am not in a position to argue this case one way or another, but those words were credited to FP most often (based on what I've heard in the past). Regardless who has authored the quote, I do agree that what was said is a central thought of interest. No questions about it. We of course know what FiA will do to a team today, if something happens to their hybrid PU and there is need for a new part.

[DoubleFart]

I am surprised that people like Bullies and Paul, two very knowledgeable people, are saying that Sainz had to give up a point position due to a stupid rule.

No. He never had a points position. The points position is where you finish, according to meeting the rules.

Sainz was in a false position because they were praying for a safety car to save him. If he had followed the rules and pitted in sync with strategy he would not have scored points.

It's like saying a guy in the 90s doing a 3 stopper lost a win to a 2 stopper because he had to make a late splash and dash. He never had the win, because he never had the fuel to finish, just like Sainz didn't have the tyres to finish.

End rant.

[Aty]

The Chinese Grand Prix as well as the Miami Grand Prix weekends will run the Sprint format for the first time during the 2024 Formula 1 season.

https://www.grandprix247.com/2023/12/05 ... s-in-2024/

That's 6 sprint sessions in total so far.

[Everso Biggyballies]

My Mother used to tell me if I have nothing nice to say, say nothing.

Nothing.

[Aty]

I don't think the list is finilized, and expecting changes. For example Chinese race (IMO) is on an edge (politics). When choosing which races to drop, I will include one or two sprint event. Probably Miami will be strong candidate.

[Michael Ferner]

"If we'd take away the pit stops/DRS/tyre rules etc. the races would be even more processional" yada yada yada yada. I've heard it so often, I can't believe people are still buying this Bull Shit. The pit stops are the original cause for processional races, there were none before F1 pit stops became the norm in the eighties, and they were here to stay once races without pit stops were all but banned in the nineties. You don't get a better product by fixing over and over again what isn't broken. "Oh, the races have become processional, we need more pit stops to spice them up" - "Oh, they're even more processional now, we need a stronger dose: even more pit stops, different tyre compounds, how about artificial overtaking..." Once you've got your head buried deep enough in shit, you can't see clear anymore. And it won't help burying it even deeper!

So let's watch one...

(Thanks Fastlane database)
Seems very processional to me.

Processional? Hmm. Five cars running nose to tail for the entire distance, with the order turned upside down at the finish; no pit stops or DRS, REAL overtakes instead. Not the greatest of all time, but surely better than anything that happened in F1 the last twenty years, no?

[Aty]

Resuscitating my fading memories, I recal how I used to be happy just waiting if Prost overtakes Senna, or Mika overtakes Michael, and that singular overtake under suspence while waiting made me happy. I am not interested to see 35 overtakes in one race. One good one makes my day. Today catching Max will take inhuman effort, but I like to observe how drivers are trying; it's worth the cost of admission. (Forget the LV circus.) I am not sure what you guys saw in F1 history which was better racing (on some tracks) than what we have now.

Admittedly there is plenty which could be better, but McLaren and Ferrari are very, very close. Keeping up with Max for 16 laps before drop off is good stuff, now rivals need stamina for keeping up with him the rest of race. Making cars smaller and lighter could be good start.

I should add - Max was identified as a sole driver who has understood workings of his tires. (Advantage Max.)

[PTRACER]

"If we'd take away the pit stops/DRS/tyre rules etc. the races would be even more processional" yada yada yada yada. I've heard it so often, I can't believe people are still buying this Bull Shit. The pit stops are the original cause for processional races, there were none before F1 pit stops became the norm in the eighties, and they were here to stay once races without pit stops were all but banned in the nineties. You don't get a better product by fixing over and over again what isn't broken. "Oh, the races have become processional, we need more pit stops to spice them up" - "Oh, they're even more processional now, we need a stronger dose: even more pit stops, different tyre compounds, how about artificial overtaking..." Once you've got your head buried deep enough in shit, you can't see clear anymore. And it won't help burying it even deeper!

So let's watch one...

(Thanks Fastlane database)
Seems very processional to me.

Processional? Hmm. Five cars running nose to tail for the entire distance, with the order turned upside down at the finish; no pit stops or DRS, REAL overtakes instead. Not the greatest of all time, but surely better than anything that happened in F1 the last twenty years, no?

I agree, I thought that was pretty interesting.

The mid 70s did have a lot of what I would call dull races. I watched a few of the 1970s races at Paul Ricard and it really was just cars going round in circles and the odd one stopping because of a breakdown. 1979 Dijon was also dull as dishwater until GV and Arnoux started battling. The very late-70s / early-80s were far better in general though.

[MonteCristo]

"If we'd take away the pit stops/DRS/tyre rules etc. the races would be even more processional" yada yada yada yada. I've heard it so often, I can't believe people are still buying this Bull Shit. The pit stops are the original cause for processional races, there were none before F1 pit stops became the norm in the eighties, and they were here to stay once races without pit stops were all but banned in the nineties. You don't get a better product by fixing over and over again what isn't broken. "Oh, the races have become processional, we need more pit stops to spice them up" - "Oh, they're even more processional now, we need a stronger dose: even more pit stops, different tyre compounds, how about artificial overtaking..." Once you've got your head buried deep enough in shit, you can't see clear anymore. And it won't help burying it even deeper!

So let's watch one...

(Thanks Fastlane database)
Seems very processional to me.

Processional? Hmm. Five cars running nose to tail for the entire distance, with the order turned upside down at the finish; no pit stops or DRS, REAL overtakes instead. Not the greatest of all time, but surely better than anything that happened in F1 the last twenty years, no?

I agree, I thought that was pretty interesting.

The mid 70s did have a lot of what I would call dull races. I watched a few of the 1970s races at Paul Ricard and it really was just cars going round in circles and the odd one stopping because of a breakdown. 1979 Dijon was also dull as dishwater until GV and Arnoux started battling. The very late-70s / early-80s were far better in general though.

I wonder how much of that was also terrible TV directing though. Without seeing lap charts (and with gaps shown as well), hard to say what the real story was.