2016 Formula 1 United States Grand PrixFormula 1 

I think there are too many races in a season. So much has happened so far this year but they were pretty much neck and neck and now when there's only 4 races left (including yesterday) each race actually has meaning. It's like the first 16 races were for nothing. In general, the last races of a season will have more an impact, but when the season is so long the start really has no impact at all. If the amount of races was shortened, there's a greater emphasis on each race, no?

It depends how you follow the sport. Myself, I don't follow any one driver and so ultimately don't care who wins the titles, I just tune in each weekend hoping for some good racing. Sure, the championship battle can add more tension to a race at the end of the season but any race can be great, if it's simply a good race.

The problem we've had this season is that the two title rivals just haven't battled directly on track often enough. With other fierce rivalries of the past most weekends they would be battling on track, sometimes with some other cars thrown in as well. This season, we've just not seen that either because they constantly get separated or because they seem incapable of doing it, with the crashes in Spain and Austria.
 
It depends how you follow the sport. Myself, I don't follow any one driver and so ultimately don't care who wins the titles, I just tune in each weekend hoping for some good racing. Sure, the championship battle can add more tension to a race at the end of the season but any race can be great, if it's simply a good race.

The problem we've had this season is that the two title rivals just haven't battled directly on track often enough. With other fierce rivalries of the past most weekends they would be battling on track, sometimes with some other cars thrown in as well. This season, we've just not seen that either because they constantly get separated or because they seem incapable of doing it, with the crashes in Spain and Austria.
Agreed, most weekends I just want something interesting to watch. Right now though I just want a decent battle for the championship. It really is on Hamilton to get every point he can and while that seems unlikely he will do well as long as the car is good.
 
Watching the start again, Nico actually had a pretty good start (as did everyone) would probably have been better to cover the inside. Or he is in Alain Prost mode and knows what he needs to win the championship and will do just that.

If I was him I'd go full out in Mexico, he likes the track and a win there would put things to rest, finishing second still risks a mechanical failure of some sorts.
 
He said that the team told him to continue if he could, but it became apparent that he couldn't make it. When he pulled over, the marshalls pressed the button to ground the ERS, but it failed; that meant a lengthy recovery time, hence the VSC. If the grounding had worked, the car could have been recovered sooner and the VSC would have been unnecessary.

You could clearly see him and the marshalls standing over the car pushing down on the monocoque forward of the cockpit; that was their attempts to ground the ERS.

That wasn't grounding the ERS, that was a Neutral button failure. I experienced the exact same problem with a GP2 car at Silverstone this year, where the Neutral button wouldn't put the car into Neutral. The VSC had been deployed before Max was even out of the car, so it would have been a lot shorter if the button had worked.
Yeah, that was the button/switch that puts the car into neutral that didn't work (as it was a transmission issue that all makes sense) and as it was still in gear, they couldn't push it anywhere. Surely touching the car, in order to ground it, so you can touch it, is a bit of a daft idea?

 
I think there are too many races in a season. So much has happened so far this year but they were pretty much neck and neck and now when there's only 4 races left (including yesterday) each race actually has meaning. It's like the first 16 races were for nothing. In general, the last races of a season will have more an impact, but when the season is so long the start really has no impact at all. If the amount of races was shortened, there's a greater emphasis on each race, no?
Maybe. It does feel like a race is over and.. now what? I'm not sure if that's because time flew past faster when i was younger or because of as you say too many races but when i was younger every race somehow seemed much more meaningful.
 
They are still meaningful in that they add to the overall score but the last few years has there really been a back and forth for 1st place throughout the season? It's usually only in the last 5 or so races that it's coming together becomes more apparent. Shorten the season and that "being aware" of the fight coming together will take up more of the season, thus making it more exciting overall.
 
Or he is in Alain Prost mode and knows what he needs to win the championship and will do just that.
I don't think he can count on that; rather, I think he's just biding his time. He knows he's got a buffer and that Hamilton has the additional pressu of needing results to go his way. He also knows that Hamilton's favourite move is to force him wide at the start. I think Rosberg is waiting for the right opportunity to take a win, rather than try and force the issue every time.
 
Which it already is.
When the safety car is deployed. But as we saw in Austin, VSC can be used without a full safety car. However, I think that if an incident is serious enough for a VSC, it's serious enough for a full safety car. That's why I suggested multiple safety cars, one for each sector; that way, a safety car can pick up the leader quickly, compress the field, and return to racing as soon as possible.
 
Safety cars have been a part of the sport for years and no one really minds how they manipulate results. While they switch around tyre strategies, they at least bunch the field back up. Rosberg ended up not only ahead of Ricciardo, on fresher tyres, but several seconds up the road. Given a safety car he would at least be within striking distance.

They might as well have just threw the safety car out there. The viritual safety car is a shortcut but it has a big loophole, and it's not like you can close the pit lane either.
 
Safety cars have been a part of the sport for years and no one really minds how they manipulate results. While they switch around tyre strategies, they at least bunch the field back up. Rosberg ended up not only ahead of Ricciardo, on fresher tyres, but several seconds up the road. Given a safety car he would at least be within striking distance.

They might as well have just threw the safety car out there. The viritual safety car is a shortcut but it has a big loophole, and it's not like you can close the pit lane either.

Speak for yourself. I hate them. I want a pure race not something contrived by throwing a yellow to close up the field behind that.
 
You could close the pit, as Fuel isn't an issue like it was back in the refuelling days, and if someone has to pit for some reason just give them a stop go(say 10 seconds) before they touch the car.
 
Safety cars have been a part of the sport for years and no one really minds how they manipulate results. While they switch around tyre strategies, they at least bunch the field back up. Rosberg ended up not only ahead of Ricciardo, on fresher tyres, but several seconds up the road. Given a safety car he would at least be within striking distance.

They might as well have just threw the safety car out there. The viritual safety car is a shortcut but it has a big loophole, and it's not like you can close the pit lane either.

You're on to something, if this was a safety car it wouldn't have ruined Ricciardo's race as much.

Problem is I think it's unfair most to the leader.
 
Recovering cars under local yellows leads to the eventual Death of Jules Bianchi.

A very sensible rule change is made to not destroy the gaps and allow cars and/or debris to be removed safely with a massively reduced chance of accident, and everyone moans.

What even is the point?
 
They are still meaningful in that they add to the overall score but the last few years has there really been a back and forth for 1st place throughout the season? It's usually only in the last 5 or so races that it's coming together becomes more apparent. Shorten the season and that "being aware" of the fight coming together will take up more of the season, thus making it more exciting overall.

Depends on the season, last season at times it seemed like it would shape up, but then Hamilton walked away with the championship and closed it out early. 2014 was a season where both drivers were plagued by issues with the car and though the car was still the best there was, we saw back and forth up until that last round.

2013 Vettel walked away with it, 2012 was a nail bitter to the end and McLaren dropped the ball for both drivers, 2011 Seb walked away with it, and 2010 was essentially a five way fight to the end.

So really you just have to follow the seasons. A short season doesn't mean any better fighting than a longer one. 2010 had 19 races, and
Recovering cars under local yellows leads to the eventual Death of Jules Bianchi.

A very sensible rule change is made to not destroy the gaps and allow cars and/or debris to be removed safely with a massively reduced chance of accident, and everyone moans.

What even is the point?

It's f1 people are going to complain either way or both.
 
A very sensible rule change is made to not destroy the gaps and allow cars and/or debris to be removed safely with a massively reduced chance of accident, and everyone moans.
If an incident is serious enough for VSC, it's serious enough for a full safety car.
 
If an incident is serious enough for VSC, it's serious enough for a full safety car.
No, they can be used as different things.

Where Max pulled off, it just needed the track neutralising while it was recovered. He was a long way away from the track, and it would usually be fine to use a Double Yellow Flag, but to be safe, a VSC was used.
Where someone has pulled off and marshals/trucks have to go on track for a minute or two, as VSC is fine. When someone crashes and needs a bit of a clear up, definitely SC.

VSC's and FCY's restrict the pace instantly, whereas a Safety Car still has the aspect of cars driving flat out pretty much to catch up to the queue. Take this year's 6 Hours of Silverstone. Hartley had his massive accident, but because all the recovery was in the gravel trap, and there was only a small amount of debris on the track, as FCY was put out, keeping everyone at 60kph, so there was pretty much zero chance of them crashing, and allowing the recovery to happen smoothly. However, later in the race, when Kobayashi shredded the left rear corner of his car on the Wellington Straight, as Full Safety Car was used. The cars needed to be bunched together to allow the marshals to have a few minutes of clear track to clean the mess up.

Both options are useful for different things. VSC's are good when there is a double yellow flag that wouldn't have been a VSC before. FCY is a MUCH better solution than VSC, but in series where either is used, it is a very good system.
 
If an incident is serious enough for VSC, it's serious enough for a full safety car.

I have to disagree, and I think Verstappen's halt was a good example of that. The conditions were good and, as soon as the team told him to stop, he stopped by an exit gap. It was unfortunate that the broken car was unable to be placed in neutral but, at that point, a VSC was still a very safe option - the speed of the cars still in the race was controlled and they weren't scrambling to get to the SC. It also meant that we didn't have a SC outlap, 2 laps running and inlap to subtract from the race.
 
Recovering cars under local yellows leads to the eventual Death of Jules Bianchi.

A very sensible rule change is made to not destroy the gaps and allow cars and/or debris to be removed safely with a massively reduced chance of accident, and everyone moans.

What even is the point?
That aspect of VSC is fine, it's people being able to pit under it that I and others take issue with.
 
If an incident is serious enough for VSC, it's serious enough for a full safety car.
Total rubbish. The actual requirements for a safety car are remarkably small and in those cases it would be better to red flag the race anyway. Code 60, FCY and VSC have rendered te safety car obsolete for anything other than artificiality closing up the field for an exciting finish.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, I'm not exactly sure what a SC adds over a VSC in terms of it's actual purpose, safety. The only thing I can think of is being able to direct drivers through debris fields they may not be able to see but even then teams can radio their drivers and tell them where to drive around any incidents.
 
That aspect of VSC is fine, it's people being able to pit under it that I and others take issue with.
It's not even that - drivers can gain or lose a massive advantage simply because of where they are on the circuit when VSC ends.
 
It's not even that - drivers can gain or lose a massive advantage simply because of where they are on the circuit when VSC ends.
Surely the same luck-of-the-draw applies to a full SC?
Not really. The VSC is how Artem Markelov (somehow) ended up winning the GP2 race in Monaco. He was going through the Mirabeau, Loews, Portier section when a VSC came out while his rivals went through Tabac and Piscine. Markelov effectively lost only a few seconds as the restricted speeds are the same as the racing speeds, while his rivals were more than 100kph down on the speed they would have done through that section, so lost a lot of time. When they pitted, Markelov was then in the lead because of it ending when it did.
 
Back