Safety Car Rules
- Thread starter Kewee
- Start date
Bro is right. There is no way that you can accurately predict the when/where/how of Safety Car deployment.
The only way you can (fairly) benefit from a SC is by reacting to its appearance.
About the only thing the teams do is factor in a bit of fuel saving, or way too much if you're McLaren.
That in itself has zero impact on who is shuffled where during a safety car period.
Otherwise you're stuffed.
That in itself has zero impact on who is shuffled where during a safety car period.
Even then, that's only possible if you're in the window and approaching the pits.
Otherwise you're stuffed.
I'm not even sure if you need to be in the "window". If you can pit within 20-30 seconds of deployment, you're gaining a boat load of time over everyone on track who is trundling round to a delta.
J
johnnoble1990
Guest
Accurately measuring is a bit different, but everything has probability*, and I imagine teams are aware that this is higher in Monaco, than in China. Everything can be measured, with the right knowledge. Unless you believe Einstein that "Bernie doesn't play dice with F1", but that is a different discussion.
*bear in mind that I'm a bit of a probability geek, so I won't be won over by the argument that a possibility cannot be measured. The accuracy of this measurement and its application to scenarios is open to debate though, and I'd completely agree that in this case there are far bigger factors teams will be thinking of, but I don't think SC's and red flags are immaterial to decisions made by F1 teams. There are probability models and distributions which will be used by teams across a weekend to measure all sorts of possibilities and these will go beyond any understanding that I have of them.
How could anybody have predicted/measured that Petrovs car would a) fail, b) on the start/finish line and c) a safety car would be neccessary?
I'm a reality geek and while I understand the need for F1 teams to plan for any eventuality, I find the notion that they can somehow apply this knowledge BEFORE a Safety Car is deployed a bit far-fetched.
Some cars will get caught out during a SC, and some will benefit. It's just down to dumb luck.
The goal of race control should be to avoid Safety Cars whenever possible. They completely ruin the true nature of a "race".
J
johnnoble1990
Guest
Well the chances of predicting that exact eventuality would be nearing impossible, but it would be completely unnecessary too. They only need a generic idea of the chances of a safety car. I could do a quick estimate now simply by diving the number of safety cars in past races, by the number of races. Then, teams can take it from there are get more complicated and more accurate.
A good example of teams ignoring the high probability of something is Lewis last year, with Perez's crash. Any accident in Monaco is likely to bring out a red flag, yet Mclaren decided to take a risk by not going out early and getting a lap in, and they paid the price. I'm sure Mclaren would've had some sort of percentage in their heads of the chances of a red flag. If they didn't, then their strategists are redundant.
There is evidence that teams respond to the probability of SC's even in the weekends race. Martin Whitmarsh said part of the reason for pitting both cars, same lap, was to cover the safety car. I'm sure the irony was not lost on them.
And what use would that data be?
It's just averages based on random events.
As I said above, all they do is factor in a small fuel saving amount based on the probability of there being a safety car.
That has no impact at all on who lucks in and who lucks out during a safety car.
J
johnnoble1990
Guest
As I said, the usefulness of the calculations are open to interpretation, the fact that there is a probability isn't. I don't think teams should ignore the possibility of safety cars though, and I don't think they do.
I'll leave it to McLaren to explain how much control they had over Hamilton's position when the safety car was deployed.
Or to put it another way, no amount of data or strategising would have had any impact on Hamilton being in the wrong place at the wrong time and Vettel being in the right place at the right time.
Or, to put it another way, pure luck.
http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/12433/7611136/-Nothing-McLaren-could-do-to-hold-second
Or to put it another way, no amount of data or strategising would have had any impact on Hamilton being in the wrong place at the wrong time and Vettel being in the right place at the right time.
Or, to put it another way, pure luck.
http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/12433/7611136/-Nothing-McLaren-could-do-to-hold-second
If the Safety Car rules aren't right, then horrible things can happen...:
So long as there can't be a farce quite that egregious, I can accept the rules. I'm OK with jumping from 3rd to 2nd, but not from 12th to 1st.
So long as there can't be a farce quite that egregious, I can accept the rules. I'm OK with jumping from 3rd to 2nd, but not from 12th to 1st.
Nobody ignores this possibility. Some just wonder about the benefits that can be gleaned from such an exercise. I for one feel that there is negligible value in running 40 million simulations covering any/all circumstances, because real life will invariably throw something out there that no supercomputer in the world could predict.
I wouldn't dare mention this to the boys back at "Mission Control" though
I respect your line of thinking John, and it is definitely more in sync with the mindset throughout the paddock, but time and again these simulations/probability matrices fail in actual practice.
J
johnnoble1990
Guest
Well one element of SC's that is pure luck is position you are on the track when it comes out. Lewis had to go further at the delta time than Vettel did which is how he got the jump, but this is also why it is a slight advantage to stay out longer in the event of SC's. SC's basically extend the gap needed to slot in ahead of someone at a pit stop. The pit stop time was about 25 seconds over the weekend, and you travel less distance in 25 seconds under SC than you do in normal conditions, therefore there is an advantage to pitting under the SC, which is why everyone dives into the pits at that time.
Tony Jardine mentioned it on SSN today - two years ago at Sepang when McLaren and Ferrari preferred their radar pictures to actually looking out the window and found themselves pushing Glock and Kovalainen out of Q1!Nobody ignores this possibility. Some just wonder about the benefits that can be gleaned from such an exercise. I for one feel that there is negligible value in running 40 million simulations covering any/all circumstances, because real life will invariably throw something out there that no supercomputer in the world could predict.
I wouldn't dare mention this to the boys back at "Mission Control" though
J
johnnoble1990
Guest
I very much agree with this. It is probably my greatest flaw.
People like me over obsess with these minor details, when often common sense will do. Please do not tell any of my future employers though. 
Not the first or last time McLaren have been "too smart for their own good"
People like me over obsess with these minor details, when often common sense will do. Please do not tell any of my future employers though.
It's all good. Once in a while you guys are spot on.
J
johnnoble1990
Guest
I did mention the other day that every team needs a common sense man. The paddock are probably full of people who calculate ever detail to decimal points, with degrees of accuracy . In situations where the answer is obvious, common sense man should pop up. I don't think they should change his job title either.
For me though, the beauty of the logic will always trump necessity. During these times, you may have to humour me.
For me though, the beauty of the logic will always trump necessity. During these times, you may have to humour me.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
