The places where we needed DRS could be improved by the changing of the circuit anyway.
Otherwise, the tyres sufficed.
DRS
- Thread starter KekeTheKing
- Start date
The places where we needed DRS could be improved by the changing of the circuit anyway.
Otherwise, the tyres sufficed.
Vortex
Race Winner
Exactly!!!!! DRS is like treating the symptom, not the cause.
But it is/was much easier to change the cars than to change to circuits. Anyway, I quite like DRS, as MB pointed out in his commentary in Suzuka isn't it great to see fast cars not being held up by slower cars. Imagine how exciting last years final race could have been if Alonso could have got past Petrov?
Annoying thing is, with these new rules, it will make the worst tracks have better races than they should have, I think it was Valencia and Abu Dhabi, and a few other tracks which at this season where thinking of making changes to their tracks to aid overtaking, but since they saw the race in Catalunya they have hung back. Of course they don't want to spend money, but as Vortex says, DRS masks the current problems.
Personally, my main bugbear is having the feeling that the result of the race is not really in much doubt. Sitting in front of the television, and really not knowing what is going to happen is what keeps me watching.
In the past, this has been achieved in many ways, mostly by nature of how the sport evolved, things like reliability, reduced aero, tyres etc.
I actually enjoyed the fuel stop era, as it was interesting to watch how the various strategies evolved, and work out who was going to finish second behind Michael.
The increase in overtaking in 2010 due to the removal of refuelling added something, but I think this year maybe it has gone a little too far. Tyres alone would have led to more interesting races, so the DRS is a little unnecessary.
I do not really mind, although sometimes things can be a little tricky to keep up with, although I cannot help thinking that a lot of that is more to do with the focus of the cameras within the race rather than anything else.
That said, I would not lament it if it were to be replaced, and I will not be upset if it stays. After all, one of the more interesting things I enjoy about F1 is the technical side, and watching how the teams implement the regulations. After all, the rules are the same for all teams, and how they are interpreted and implemented in itself can define how good the racing is.
In the past, this has been achieved in many ways, mostly by nature of how the sport evolved, things like reliability, reduced aero, tyres etc.
I actually enjoyed the fuel stop era, as it was interesting to watch how the various strategies evolved, and work out who was going to finish second behind Michael.
The increase in overtaking in 2010 due to the removal of refuelling added something, but I think this year maybe it has gone a little too far. Tyres alone would have led to more interesting races, so the DRS is a little unnecessary.
I do not really mind, although sometimes things can be a little tricky to keep up with, although I cannot help thinking that a lot of that is more to do with the focus of the cameras within the race rather than anything else.
That said, I would not lament it if it were to be replaced, and I will not be upset if it stays. After all, one of the more interesting things I enjoy about F1 is the technical side, and watching how the teams implement the regulations. After all, the rules are the same for all teams, and how they are interpreted and implemented in itself can define how good the racing is.
It seems that most people acknowledge the massive part the Pirelli's have played in the dramatic increase in overtaking and the somewhat "artificial" nature of many maneuvers. And the tires have been roundly hailed as an enormous success.
At the same time DRS is attacked on roughly the same grounds. Maybe it's down to the Slot Gap opening up, representing a visible boost in top speed. There really isn't a comparable visual effect like that with a "tire mismatch" overtake.
The number of "DRS" overtakes and "Tire Mismatch" overtakes is a lot closer than most people realize.
At the same time DRS is attacked on roughly the same grounds. Maybe it's down to the Slot Gap opening up, representing a visible boost in top speed. There really isn't a comparable visual effect like that with a "tire mismatch" overtake.
The number of "DRS" overtakes and "Tire Mismatch" overtakes is a lot closer than most people realize.
I am not a fan of both, but with the tyres the driver isn't disadvantaged and fate is a bit more in his hands as he can look after them and can still defend, unlike DRS where at most times you can't defend as the driver behind breezes past, both of them have absurd rules concerning them.
DRS, in qualifying you can use it where ever you want, during the race only at a certain time.
Tyres, you can be the slowest in qualifying 1 yet you can make it up in the race as you have fresher set of tyres, - it ruins qualifying as some drivers don't bother with a lap, it also gives the slower driver in qualifying an advantage. How many times has Maldonado got into Q3 but went backwards? Now for the midfield teams you are afraid to get a high qualifying position since you will be disadvantaged in the race. Ever since F1 has started qualifying has been about achieving the highest position possible so you can have a good race.
Both are a bit farcical in my opinion, I used to be critical of KERS as it reminded me of A1 GP, but it isn't that bad.
For me because everybody is in the same position with the tyres. With DRS the driver in front is disadvantaged.
Agreed.
I absolutely loathe both DRS and the tyre rules.
As Slyboogy said, once upon a time qualifying used to be about trying to get as high up the grid as you could.
Now it's about making sure you've got enough tyres for the race, to the detriment of qualifying.
Don't get me started on the ridiculous "must use both compounds" rule
As for being able to use DRS at all times during qualifying but only in a particular zone during the race, what the hell is that about?
Has anyone explained why that rule was implemented?
My interest in F1 has definitely diminished this season.
I posted this a while ago, and if anything my opinion is now stronger than ever: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/has-overtaking-in-formula-one-become-devalued.2643/
Yours,
Disappointed of London
There is a huge disadvantage to a driver on older tires versus a driver on fresh tires. These are the moves I'm talking about. When the driver in front knows he's a sitting duck.
If a driver comes out of the pits behind a stack of drivers on tires 12 or so laps old, it's not much a matter of if they'll pass them, but when. This is why teams can pretty much pit whenever they want now. They know there is only a small chance of being massively held up.
I'm not saying I don't like this type of tire in F1, I was just wondering why people can accept the Pirelli's easier than the DRS, when they present similar benefits and drawbacks.
edit - Bro, I agree with you about several parts of the tire regulations, and if they don't add a little durability to the rubber next year, I might come all the way around to your view.
This happened in 2010 aswell with Kobayashi in Valencia, and Kubica in Singapore, I'm sure there are more examples from 2010 but those 2 come to my head most notably, they aren't sitting ducks in 2010. They aren't sitting ducks with tyres either in 2011, as there have been a lot of races especially in the first half of the season where a driver on old tyres vs a driver on new managed to hold track position for several laps, despite being 2-3s slower than the leading pace or from people on fresher tyres, that is until they get to the DRS zone.
You could argue they are sitting ducks in 2011 with the tyres, but that's where DRS actually comes into play, if you have a bad exit out of a corner where the DRS is and you are on old tyres against someone on fresher ones, the overtaking move is somewhat inevitable.
Again, I am not a fan of both, but if I had to pick between the two it would have to be tyres that stay over DRS, as DRS is just silly, confusing, and most important of all, not needed.
The tire situations in 2010 and 2011 aren't even close at all. No comparisons can be made whatsoever.
It is a rare occasion this season when a driver on fresh tires is held up by a driver out of sequence on old tires.
It is a rare occasion this season when a driver on fresh tires is held up by a driver out of sequence on old tires.
What else are we meant to compare it too? If drivers on fresh tyres last year could pass those on less fresh tyres comfortably like this season why is it not comparable?
Like I said you can argue that they can until they get up to the DRS point.
Don't want to go back and forth Sly, but if you have a chance, watch a 2010 race and tell me the tire situations are comparable. A Bridgestone Super Soft would go 20+ laps with very little degradation. They really only changed because they were forced to by regulations.
Oh I totally agree Keke and I hate the tyres this year, they've done more to ruin the racing for me than DRS easily and I also hate the two compound rule. The small difference between this and DRS though is that top ten qualifying lap aside (which I also despise) is that the teams are all given the same tyres and so strategy/set up and drivers are able to make the difference. DRS is set to deliberately disadvantage one driver and advantage another.
Yes it creates more action but I'm most certainly not excited by racing this year. I was delighted when refuelling was removed as I thought I was going to see racing done on the circuit. I don't see how DRS and indeed these stupid silly putty tyres constitute racing.
Yes it creates more action but I'm most certainly not excited by racing this year. I was delighted when refuelling was removed as I thought I was going to see racing done on the circuit. I don't see how DRS and indeed these stupid silly putty tyres constitute racing.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
