Dumbest rules in motorsports.

[Carbonox]

Title. Post all about the rules that make your blood boil the most, whether it's for their complete lack of common sense or some other reason.

For me, probably the way ARCA's insistence to go for overtime restarts even when a caution came out on the white flag lap, sometimes even overruling the leader crossing the finish line right after the incident. GWC's in general feel arbitrary enough to me at times, but this type of ruling just takes it to a whole new level when even the last lap isn't "safe" for someone in a comfortable lead.

I really hate the "fans deserve a green flag finish!" mentality that created this... it just screams entitlement to me. 🤬 happens, sometimes a race just doesn't play out like you'd want it to. A yellow flag finish here and there shouldn't automatically mean the entirety of the race is suddenly a complete waste of their time and possibly money.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Formula 1. Both sporting and technical regs. "Pinnacle of motorsport"... like my ass is the pinnacle of "Sights to see in rural England".

 

[Liquid]

The fuel flow ratio in Formula One a few years back.

Give them 100kg race total and 🤬 the ratio. See you at the chequered flag.

Wanna burn it? Burn it.
Wanna save it? Save it.

Just race.

 

[GOTMAXPOWER]

In WRC the only punishment for missing your start time is a time penalty but the cars doing it are already minutes behind anybody else.

 

[DG_Silva]

The blue flag in F1 - if you're faster than the guy you're lapping, then get ahead of him already, don't expect him to jump out of the way. Indycar does blue flags much better - the lapped car just ignores them....

 

[Nismonath5]

The blue flag in F1 - if you're faster than the guy you're lapping, then get ahead of him already, don't expect him to jump out of the way. Indycar does blue flags much better - the lapped car just ignores them....

I've always believed blue flags should be a heads up, a warning that the leader's coming. Not a "get right out of the way and surrender yourself to the car behind".

 

[Liquid]

The blue flag in F1 - if you're faster than the guy you're lapping, then get ahead of him already, don't expect him to jump out of the way. Indycar does blue flags much better - the lapped car just ignores them....

I understand what you mean but there should definitely be an explicit clarification that cars being lapped cannot defend their road position, i.e. taking a defensive line or blocking.

Like @Nismonath5, it could be better interpreted as a heads up warning rather than an instruction to roll over and play dead.

Monaco would be even more tedious than usual if slower drivers spent the whole race not moving over to be lapped.

 

[Prince.M5]

Some will disagree with me, but I've always thought the helmet livery restriction change in F1 a bit silly.

In order for drivers to be easily distinguished from one another whilst they are on the track, the crash helmet of each driver must, with the exception of one event of the driver's choice, be presented in substantially the same livery at every event during a championship season.

I mean, really just let the drivers do whatever that they want to their helmet whether they want to change it every race or whatever. As if we, on track can properly see their helmet in the car anyway, let alone now that we have the Halo device. It's also a struggle even on TV to distinguish between the drivers so I don't see the significance. I know some might say yeah it's the driver's identity and so forth, but even on current F1 graphics on TV they don't even show their helmet design next to their names etc. unlike what we had some 10 years ago. Thankfully the rule has been lifted off for 2020.

EDIT: And if you guys remember Abu Dhabi 2014 double points race? Yeah.. I mean, surely the fastest car would win the race anyway, as much as how they might have dominated the whole season so how significant is this? Perhaps only for the 2 drivers of that time, Hamilton and Rosberg.

 

[05XR8]

Oh my Virgin Australia Supercars watchers: Time certain finishes.

There is one big problem this series continues to make for itself, starting races too late in the afternoon. It leaves no window to complete the NUMBER OF LAPS(this is the key point), if there is a disruption in the race.

Weather(rain) has caused delays in starting and finishing races. Multi-car collisions, track breaking up, tyre barriers, safety barriers/tyre bundles.

The thing is, ALL VASC races run to a time limit. Yet, VASC use a lap counter. Why have an inevitable time certain finish, when the race can just be run to the clock?
Bathurst is probably the only race that will complete it's 161 laps. Longest "current" race(in the last 10 years), ran to about 8 hours. This included fixing up a broken track(the race was stopped and resumed), multiple collisions, etc.

This rule totally ruined so many flag to flag races. It's being addressed to run races earlier in the afternoon, but check this! There was even a time certain finish in. the freakin'. ESERIES!!!!
Everyone was at home, what the heck?!!

 

[Jimlaad43]

The blue flag in F1 - if you're faster than the guy you're lapping, then get ahead of him already, don't expect him to jump out of the way. Indycar does blue flags much better - the lapped car just ignores them....

I've always believed blue flags should be a heads up, a warning that the leader's coming. Not a "get right out of the way and surrender yourself to the car behind".

I understand what you mean but there should definitely be an explicit clarification that cars being lapped cannot defend their road position, i.e. taking a defensive line or blocking.

Like @Nismonath5, it could be better interpreted as a heads up warning rather than an instruction to roll over and play dead.

Monaco would be even more tedious than usual if slower drivers spent the whole race not moving over to be lapped.

In everything except F1 the blue flag is exactly that - a non-mandatory advisory flag. It just tells the car ahead that they're going to be lapped and to be prepared for that. There is nothing mandatory about it, but drivers can still be reported for deliberately ignoring the blue flag if they do something dangerous or stupid after seeing the flag.

 

[DG_Silva]

In everything except F1 the blue flag is exactly that - a non-mandatory advisory flag. It just tells the car ahead that they're going to be lapped and to be prepared for that. There is nothing mandatory about it, but drivers can still be reported for deliberately ignoring the blue flag if they do something dangerous or stupid after seeing the flag.

That's absolutely right - no other motorsport expects the driver being lapped to slow right down and allow the faster driver through to wreck their own race. I thoroughly agree that it should be a warning to the slower driver and to be aware of a faster driver coming through, but in F1 it seems to count as a gimme.

From what I understand, it was Senna who was griping about it first, that drivers would not jump out of his way when the flags are waved despite being guilty of it himself. Japan 1993 with Irvine was a perfect example.

I understand what you mean but there should definitely be an explicit clarification that cars being lapped cannot defend their road position, i.e. taking a defensive line or blocking.

Like @Nismonath5, it could be better interpreted as a heads up warning rather than an instruction to roll over and play dead.

Monaco would be even more tedious than usual if slower drivers spent the whole race not moving over to be lapped.

Like you suggested @Liquid, there would have to be exceptions in places such as Monaco, or perhaps a slackening of the rule to say that you can't hold someone up for more than a lap, rather than 3 marshals' stands, which could potentially only be a quarter of the lap. Hopefully, the new aero rules will help this.

 

[Liquid]

The former "greatest distance" rule at Le Mans. It cost Ken Miles/Denny Hulme victory in 1966 when a team photo finish actually saw second-on-the-road Bruce McLaren/Chris Amon win by 13 metres because the McLaren/Amon car started slightly further down the starting grid so covered more distance.

We all know it cost Miles a victory that year but it also robbed him of what would have been an astonishing feat of endurance: he had already won the endurance classics at Sebring and Daytona and a Le Mans win would have seen him become not only the first driver to win all three endurance classics, but the first driver to win all three in the same year.

February 1966: Wins at Daytona
March 1966: Wins at Sebring
June 1966: Finishes "2nd" at Le Mans

It's so annoying that it doesn't count. Miles was killed two months after Le Mans in a test at Riverside and never got the chance to correct the mistake.

 

[DesertPenguin]

The former "greatest distance" rule at Le Mans. It cost Ken Miles/Denny Hulme victory in 1966 when a team photo finish actually saw second-on-the-road Bruce McLaren/Chris Amon win by 13 metres because the McLaren/Amon car started slightly further down the starting grid so covered more distance.

We all know it cost Miles a victory that year but it also robbed him of what would have been an astonishing feat of endurance: he had already won the endurance classics at Sebring and Daytona and a Le Mans win would have seen him become not only the first driver to win all three endurance classics, but the first driver to win all three in the same year.

February 1966: Wins at Daytona
March 1966: Wins at Sebring
June 1966: Finishes "2nd" at Le Mans

It's so annoying that it doesn't count. Miles was killed two months after Le Mans in a test at Riverside and never got the chance to correct the mistake.

Seeing the movie and finding out that that part of it was 100% authentic brought a tear to my eye. The stupid technicality, the death soon after. It's really rough. A little teary just thinking about it. I don't do well with death though...

 

[Liquid]

Dropped scores has always been something I have intensely disliked.

"Only the best 11 results from 16 races count"

Well, just have 11 races then. What's the point in the other 5 after the fact? Dropped scores punishes drivers who consistently finish and finish well:

1988
Actual Scores
Prost: 105pts
Senna: 94pts

Dropped Scores
Senna: 90pts
Prost: 87pts

Prost lost a staggering 18 points. That's almost two clear victories. He finished 1st or 2nd 14 times in 16 races whereas Senna was less consistent, finishing 1st or 2nd 11 times in 16 races; maybe only slightly less consitent but still less consistent.

In the interest of full disclosure Senna won 8 races to Prost's 7 which is absolutely fair and uncontested but really, finishing more races and more often on the top two steps of the podium to drop 18 points compared to just 4 is insane. I'm so glad that we don't have to deal with these sorts of fiascos any more.

 

[PeterJB]

Starting the race on the tyres you qualified with. You shouldn't have to be punished for making it to Q3.

 

[ShiftingGears]

The former "greatest distance" rule at Le Mans. It cost Ken Miles/Denny Hulme victory in 1966 when a team photo finish actually saw second-on-the-road Bruce McLaren/Chris Amon win by 13 metres because the McLaren/Amon car started slightly further down the starting grid so covered more distance.

We all know it cost Miles a victory that year but it also robbed him of what would have been an astonishing feat of endurance: he had already won the endurance classics at Sebring and Daytona and a Le Mans win would have seen him become not only the first driver to win all three endurance classics, but the first driver to win all three in the same year.

February 1966: Wins at Daytona
March 1966: Wins at Sebring
June 1966: Finishes "2nd" at Le Mans

It's so annoying that it doesn't count. Miles was killed two months after Le Mans in a test at Riverside and never got the chance to correct the mistake.

Shouldve read the rulebook tbh

 

[wfooshee]

Some will disagree with me, but I've always thought the helmet livery restriction change in F1 a bit silly.

Especially now that you can hardly even see the helmet in the car any more!

EDIT:

Remember BAR in '99, when they had two sponsorship brands and wanted to run one car with Lucky Strike and the other with 555? FIA said "NOPE! Must be same livery on both cars in a team!" So they made the left side one sponsor and the right the other, right down to driver suits and team uniforms.

 

[Carbonox]

I remember when BAR actually used a full 555 livery in Shanghai 2004, but only during free practice since mid-season livery changes were prohibited. The color scheme still persisted in the pit crew's outfits though, so there was a rare utter discrepancy between them and the cars they were working on.

 

[Leadfoot530]

The entire NASCAR Playoffs system. Racing to me has always been about consistency over an entire season. This format throws that completely out the window. Racing isn't a stick-and-ball sport where two teams face each other and that's it, so it makes zero sense.

To briefly explain it, NASCAR has a regular season and tbe Playoffs. If you win a race during the regular season, you're eligible for a 16-car post season, made up of ten races. To make it even more convoluted, each race during the year is three stages. If you win a stage, you earn a playoff point. These points are applied tp tbe 16 cars in the Playoffs. After every third race in the playoffs, the bottom four cars in points of the 16 are eliminated from contention. With one race remaining, the final four cars race for the championship, whoever finishes highest of the four wins the championship.

It's so unnecessary and creates manufactured drama that the sanctioning body has been relying on to drive ratings back up. It's said that its supposed to make winning more important however, both teams that won the most races in 2020, didn't win the championship.

It's so artificial feeling that it sucks any enjoyment of watching a race even more than a ten car draft at Daytona.

Speaking of drafting, I'll let somebody else explain the aero package.

 

[Samus]

Being allowed to repair your car and change tyres during a red flag period. Red flags should just neutralise the race whilst whatever reason for calling it is sorted, the same as if all the cars came to a stop on the race track and then got going again. Teams shouldn't be allowed to completely mess with the cars mid race IMO. The only way that should happen is if the resumption is classed as a totally new race, not a continuation.

 

[Dolph Drago]

The entire NASCAR Playoffs system. Racing to me has always been about consistency over an entire season. This format throws that completely out the window. Racing isn't a stick-and-ball sport where two teams face each other and that's it, so it makes zero sense.

To briefly explain it, NASCAR has a regular season and tbe Playoffs. If you win a race during the regular season, you're eligible for a 16-car post season, made up of ten races. To make it even more convoluted, each race during the year is three stages. If you win a stage, you earn a playoff point. These points are applied tp tbe 16 cars in the Playoffs. After every third race in the playoffs, the bottom four cars in points of the 16 are eliminated from contention. With one race remaining, the final four cars race for the championship, whoever finishes highest of the four wins the championship.

It's so unnecessary and creates manufactured drama that the sanctioning body has been relying on to drive ratings back up. It's said that its supposed to make winning more important however, both teams that won the most races in 2020, didn't win the championship.

It's so artificial feeling that it sucks any enjoyment of watching a race even more than a ten car draft at Daytona.

Speaking of drafting, I'll let somebody else explain the aero package.

Funny you should mention this, as I just watched this video of S1apSh0es' Monday.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Being allowed to repair your car and change tyres during a red flag period. Red flags should just neutralise the race whilst whatever reason for calling it is sorted, the same as if all the cars came to a stop on the race track and then got going again.

Presuming you're talking about F1... if it was a full course yellow, Safety Car or VSC the cars would be allowed to change tyres and repair certain types of damage, that's why it's the same under the red flag.

Teams shouldn't be allowed to completely mess with the cars mid race IMO.

They can't "completely" mess with the car, they can change parts like-for-like (we saw parts being weighed onto one of the cars by Jo Bauer during a recent red flag) but only within limits. Some repairs have to be made in the garage regardless of race status and others are simply not allowed.

Effectively the rules are the same under yellows as under reds. If you were to change it as per your suggestion then the safest option for crashed drivers would penalise other teams/drivers for no obvious reason.

 

[Samus]

Presuming you're talking about F1... if it was a full course yellow, Safety Car or VSC the cars would be allowed to change tyres and repair certain types of damage, that's why it's the same under the red flag.



They can't "completely" mess with the car, they can change parts like-for-like (we saw parts being weighed onto one of the cars by Jo Bauer during a recent red flag) but only within limits. Some repairs have to be made in the garage regardless of race status and others are simply not allowed.

Effectively the rules are the same under yellows as under reds. If you were to change it as per your suggestion then the safest option for crashed drivers would penalise other teams/drivers for no obvious reason.

But there is a clear difference, doing it in a live race under some form of yellow will still very likely cost you track position, something Mercedes obviously found out with their calamity.

If it were a red flag, Mercedes could've changed tyres on both cars, got it right, with zero position penalty. Doesn't sit right with me. The race is just paused, frozen exactly where it was. There should be minimal interference in the interim IMO.

 

[TenEightyOne]

But there is a clear difference, doing it in a live race under some form of yellow will still very likely cost you track position, something Mercedes obviously found out with their calamity.

If it were a red flag, Mercedes could've changed tyres on both cars, got it right, with zero position penalty. Doesn't sit right with me. The race is just paused, frozen exactly where it was. There should be minimal interference in the interim IMO.

But all the drivers are making a pit stop or, in the event of pit lane closure, are stopping on the grid. Just like a SC where you can see almost all the pack pit. As long as the rules remain the same for pit stops then that's okay with me. If the drivers want to change their tyres using their allocation then they can, depending on the nature of the red flag and the debris that cars may have run through there's often visible tyre damage.

 

[kikie]

DTM: a weight rule used to be the most stupid rule in autosport. I don't think this rule still exists, I'm not sure.

https://www.touringcartimes.com/2015/09/21/dtm-performance-weights-rule-set-to-change-for-2016/

Weight - The total weight of the car, including driver, must exceed 1,120kg, with performance weight added after the first race, depending on finishing position.

 

[kungtotte_]

Weight rules aren't bad if they're implemented well, which it sounds like the DTM rule wasn't. In such lightweight cars, a difference of 30 kilos is staggering.

I think as a rule it's also better to go by season standings rather than previous race results. The second race might be a bit wonky, but it'll even out during the season and prevent a yo-yo effect.

 

[wfooshee]

Hear, Hear! on the NASCAR stupidity! I didn't even think about that because I haven't had any interest in NASCAR since they stopped actually racing stock cars. (I AM old enough to remember when Detroit iron was run around Daytona!) Obviously, highway cars with souped-up engines and a roll cage just weren't cutting it, safety-wise, but it's now a spec-racer series, with outdated equipment. They only embraced fuel injection in 2012, TWENTY-TWO YEARS after any carburetor-fueled car was available from an American manufacturer. Anyway, they've been silhouette racers for a very long time, now, and calling them Chevys, Fords, and Toyotas is simply offensive.

But then the split races... A 500-mile race!!! Yay!!! No, wait... hang on... It's three races, 162.5 miles, 162.5 miles again, then 170 miles. Points are awarded at each stage, with the final stage having more points. But wait, there's more! There are TWO kinds of points awarded: playoff points for stage winners and race winners, and race points for everybody. Playoff points don't actually count until the "postseason" starts. Oh, yeah... when I said race points for everybody, that is LITERAL! FORTIETH PLACE still gets a race point. That's LAST PLACE!

Who comes up with this crap?!?!?

Run a race! An ENTIRE race! Give out points to the top several, but not the entire freaking field! Maybe a bonus point for pole position.

 

[Carbonox]

So here's something - the old BTCC format where the overall championship was awarded to whoever had the best record in their own class, even if said class was well behind the actual fastest cars on the grid, so it became a matter of who was the most dominant driver in a specific group. One of the worst cases was John Cleland taking the 1989 championship with a best finish of 9th, but class wins in all but 2 races.

It's like awarding the 1987 F1 title to Jonathan Palmer because he scored more points for the Colin Chapman Trophy than Piquet did in the overall championship.

 

[Liquid]

One of the worst cases was John Cleland taking the 1989 championship with a best finish of 9th, but class wins in all but 2 races.

The worst cases during that period were Chris Hodgetts' back-to-back titles in 1986 and 1987 because he did it in the lowest and slowest of the four classes.

If you were to award the BTCC by the class of the fastest cars with the biggest engines during the 1980s, i.e. the ones we would think of as "really" winning the races, it would look like this:

1980 Champion - Gordon Spice (Ford Capri) Actual Champion - Win Percy (Mazda RX-7)
1981 Champion - Pete Lovett (Ford Capri) Actual Champion - Win Percy (Mazda RX-7)
1982 Champion - Jeff Allam (Rover Vitesse) Actual Champion - Win Percy (Toyota Corolla)
1983 Champion - Andy Rouse (Alfa Romeo GTV6)
1984 Champion - Andy Rouse (Rover Vitesse)
1985 Champion - Andy Rouse (Ford Sierra XR4Ti)
1986 Champion - Andy Rouse (Ford Sierra XR4Ti) Actual Champion - Chris Hodgetts (Toyota Corolla)
1987 Champion - Tim Harvey (Rover Vitesse) Actual Champion - Chris Hodgetts (Toyota Corolla)
1988 Champion - Andy Rouse (Ford Sierra RS500) Actual Champion - Frank Sytner (BMW M3)
1989 Champion - Andy Rouse (Ford Sierra RS500) Actual Champion - John Cleland (Vauxhall Astra)

So you would have had Gordon Spice and Pete Lovett winning their only titles, Tim Harvey with an extra title, John Cleland with one less, none for Chris Hodgetts and Frank Sytner, and Andy Rouse with three more bringing his total to seven.

It's like awarding the 1987 F1 title to Jonathan Palmer because he scored more points for the Colin Chapman Trophy than Piquet did in the overall championship.

The Jim Clark Trophy, but yeah. He scored 95 points whereas Piquet "only" scored 73.

 

[Com Fox]

I really don't like NASCARs, win a race and you're automatically in the playoff/chase.

I think consistency gets thrown completely out the window in first half of the season in it's inception. Win a race and you don't even care anymore. Points only matter for the last spot or any other spots vacant due to not enough diverse winners.

They tried to solve this issue with cutting the race into 1/3 and awarding "playoff" Points to make race winners still try but now its just a giant mess.

NASCAR has made it convoluted to try and make winning a race feel impactful to the Championship but there is such an easier solution than all this...

...just fix the Points system to benefit the winner more.