Poll DRS - Your opinions on it now
- Thread starter landogeorgelewis1
- Start date
Please refresh your memory with post #48 authored by yourself where you respond to Gethinceri's mention of F-Duct. Please also see post #50, authored by yourself, which was a response to me where I was embellishing on the F-Duct comparison.
Please also stop picking fights, I've not seen you do much else. One olive branch should be enough, but the tree is nearly bare now.
Please also stop picking fights, I've not seen you do much else. One olive branch should be enough, but the tree is nearly bare now.
Breathing exercises anyone?
I've given up on breathing, or even posting a response. I am just waiting to die now.
I didn't like the F1 we had before DRS. I consider myself a fan and voted "for". I would reservedly like to see a move more towards mechanical grip but it would be a step backwards for the sport to move away from aero, and I think that a move in this direction would be more for "the spectacle" than anything else. The level of aero is the biggest differentiator between F1 and other motorsports. It may create problems, as some see, but I prefer to see them as challenges. F1 is about the engineering competition before the drivers and always has been.
I have always disliked the DRS regulations, the dreaded '1 second behind rule' with designated DRS zones, these I think are a gimmick. Where they've got the zones wrong it's resulted in people simply driving round the car in front, which is a bit rubbish. I also think there are factors more important than overtaking in creating exciting races/championships, I would still cite 2007 and 2008 as my favourite seasons as these were the years that really started to transform me from someone who watched most races in to a more 'hard-core' fan, for example.
Having said that I have nothing against the technology itself, I'd just prefer it if it was used a different way. I'd prefer it to be a KERS like system that drivers can use for a certain amount of time per lap or a certain number of times per race like other people have mentioned. I also think that given the current tyre situation so far this year all the teams may have stopped their drivers from having on track battles if it wasn't for DRS. Many of them are already scared to let them fight it out (see Malaysia)!
Having said that I have nothing against the technology itself, I'd just prefer it if it was used a different way. I'd prefer it to be a KERS like system that drivers can use for a certain amount of time per lap or a certain number of times per race like other people have mentioned. I also think that given the current tyre situation so far this year all the teams may have stopped their drivers from having on track battles if it wasn't for DRS. Many of them are already scared to let them fight it out (see Malaysia)!
Unfortunately it seems that, as Brogan said, F1 is being more and more catered towards the casual viewer, moving the start times in Australia and Malaysia, the DRS overtaking system which I think is just a cheap solution to a long term problem that possibly needn't exist. Overtaking isn't the be all and end all of exciting races, just look at Imola 2005. Unfortunately, the casual viewer seems to disagree
Very true, but a fundamental technological inability to overtake will certainly make for a poor race or sometimes no race at all, and that can't be a good thing. People talk about DRS producing "artificial over-taking" but I think that is nonsense. DRS is there to provide a means of allowing racing whilst maintaining a competition between highly developed aerodynamically designed racing cars.
I want to see the most highly developed racecars in the world and I also want to be able to see them race. DRS, in my opinion, is a very elegant solution to be able to provide just that - not just for the spectators, but also for the teams and drivers, who are also mostly in favour of it.
The only drivers that really seem to moan about it are the Red Bull drivers but that is because straight-line speed is often the achilles heel of the machinery they have.
Now what is artificial is the tyre design which, as Pirelli will attest to, is purposefully designed for sub-optimal performance. The same is not true of DRS, although the method of application is.
I want to see the most highly developed racecars in the world and I also want to be able to see them race. DRS, in my opinion, is a very elegant solution to be able to provide just that - not just for the spectators, but also for the teams and drivers, who are also mostly in favour of it.
The only drivers that really seem to moan about it are the Red Bull drivers but that is because straight-line speed is often the achilles heel of the machinery they have.
Now what is artificial is the tyre design which, as Pirelli will attest to, is purposefully designed for sub-optimal performance. The same is not true of DRS, although the method of application is.
But he can use the same option to get back in front. We saw this repeatedly last week. Anyway, it is not DRS which is artificial, but it's implementation. You seem to have completely missed my point.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
"The key point is the method of application is artificial..."
... as strictly dictated by FIA/race control. Which is the heart of the issue and the bug-bear. It's all very well talking about aero' as part of the technological challenge but the mechanical engineering aspects of the challenge are straight-jacketed with innovation in that area now largely stifled. We can be thankful that the reg's change for 2014 will bring a little of that back, at least for while.
... as strictly dictated by FIA/race control. Which is the heart of the issue and the bug-bear. It's all very well talking about aero' as part of the technological challenge but the mechanical engineering aspects of the challenge are straight-jacketed with innovation in that area now largely stifled. We can be thankful that the reg's change for 2014 will bring a little of that back, at least for while.
Yes. Another bunch of technological engineering challenges which are to be looked forward to. Will be interesting to see how the various teams adapt.
So is it the rulebook or the technology that you arguing against?
I personally don't feel that there was anything artificial about the Rosberg/Hamilton battle through the DRS zones last week. That was still bloody good racing. That it would not have happened without DRS does not make it artificial. It simply means that they used the tools available to them. The driver in front, in this case, used it to better advantage on both occasions.
I personally don't feel that there was anything artificial about the Rosberg/Hamilton battle through the DRS zones last week. That was still bloody good racing. That it would not have happened without DRS does not make it artificial. It simply means that they used the tools available to them. The driver in front, in this case, used it to better advantage on both occasions.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article
