Formula 1 Magyar Nagydíj 2016

  • Thread starter Jimlaad43
  • 509 comments
  • 20,417 views
Samus
It makes sense on one hand but on the other hand how is this better for us, the viewer? We're now going to have situations where two drivers are in a battle, or could potentially be, and one the drivers has to serve a self-imposed drive through so he can be told to fix something that he could've been told on the track.
Click to expand...
I get your point but I personally dont mind it. If something is broken on your car it's normal you're loosing time. Yes they could probably fix it on the go but personally this rule doesnt bother me, like I said I think it's normal you're loosing time if you can' t make your car reliable enough to not have to fix something during the race.

I really want to know the penalty if they do say something tho.
 
RX-7_FD3S
I get your point but I personally dont mind it. If something is broken on your car it's normal you're loosing time. Yes they could probably fix it on the go but personally this rule doesnt bother me, like I said I think it's normal you're loosing time if you can' t make your car reliable enough to not have to fix something during the race.

I really want to know the penalty if they do say something tho.
Click to expand...

Sure, problems happen but nobody actually wants to see them, do they? We want to see racing, hypothetically if there was a magic switch to eradicate car issues entirely wouldn't you want it flipped? Likewise if a car can be fixed remotely to allow cars to continue to race, I'm all for it. I wanted to see Hamilton to continue to race in Baku, I wanted Rosberg to continue racing at Silverstone. I, as a viewer, gain nothing by seeing them struggle or now seeing them drive through the pits.

As the old saying goes "Rules are rules" and Mercedes broke them last race but they're still stupid IMO. They need to put their heads together and find a way to block only obvious driver coaching (Brake later, go down a gear, turn in later) that's all it needed. I'm pretty sure most fans don't care if the engineers are telling them ways to make the car faster but still requiring the driver to exploit it.
 
Samus
Sure, problems happen but nobody actually wants to see them, do they? We want to see racing, hypothetically if there was a magic switch to eradicate car issues entirely wouldn't you want it flipped? Likewise if a car can be fixed remotely to allow cars to continue to race, I'm all for it. I wanted to see Hamilton to continue to race in Baku, I wanted Rosberg to continue racing at Silverstone. I, as a viewer, gain nothing by seeing them struggle or now seeing them drive through the pits.

As the old saying goes "Rules are rules" and Mercedes broke them last race but they're still stupid IMO. They need to put their heads together and find a way to block only obvious driver coaching (Brake later, go down a gear, turn in later) that's all it needed. I'm pretty sure most fans don't care if the engineers are telling them ways to make the car faster but still requiring the driver to exploit it.
Click to expand...

There's nothing more I can add, like I said this rule seems ok to me, they can fix thing but with a time penalty by passing through the pit. If team want to avoid it, they just need to be extra safe and make sure all system are correctly setup at the start of the GP (mercedes admited Lewis had the wrong setup since the start of the GP) and make sure it works for the whole GP.

For me the start under the safety car is a much bigger and annoying problem, add to that the fact that they have wet tyre but never really use them, I just dont get it. Yes I know what aquaplanning is but like Carlos Sainz JR said, let them do 3-4 laps, by that time they know where puddle are and they can avoid them. No need to wait for the track to be ready for inter, it just doesnt make sens.
 
RX-7_FD3S
I get your point but I personally dont mind it. If something is broken on your car it's normal you're loosing time. Yes they could probably fix it on the go but personally this rule doesnt bother me, like I said I think it's normal you're loosing time if you can' t make your car reliable enough to not have to fix something during the race.

I really want to know the penalty if they do say something tho.
Click to expand...

But there is a vast difference between something needing an electronic reset and being broken, or needing more finesse and being broken. As I said not all tech problems are created equal. Just saying broken under one large umbrella is probably the stupidest thing I've seen from the FIA yet.

Also there is a big difference from say spending 15 minutes on the pit road to fix an issue (this isn't an FP it's a race we're talking about), and driving around the track at a decent speed. For example, Nico Rosberg even with a missing gear still was able to net his team a vital 12 points in Britain. However, under these regs were led to believe that he'd have either had to come to pit road and be told about the issue or retire the car, thus significantly losing out for him and his team.

How is that at all reasonable? The idea that this is as simple as "too bad so sad, make a panzer for next race" is a silly notion considering one these aren't suppose to be bullet proof tanks and two they're quite strong for the abuse they get put through under the tolerance other cars couldn't hope to have, and no other racing series I know of bans race engineers from relaying vital problems going on with the car, or how to fix them.

My issue here is those who see this accept it and see the issue as black and white as the FIA paints it.
 
Btw, I'm not sure, but almost sure... I seem to keep hearing the teams telling the drivers to "overtake him now, use the - whatever it's called - overtake button"... what's up with that, how is that not coaching..?
 
Well let's take Rosberg example, if this rules was in place, he would have to make a drive trough, which is costing like 15 sec. Which is 5 more than the 10 he got last time. With this he would still be 3rd. I dont see the trouble here. As soon as he enter pitlane, engineer tell him to not use 7th gear and he would have been gone again. No need to even stop at his box.

Obviously we dont share the same opinion which is fine for me :D

H20HYBRID_GT
Btw, I'm not sure, but almost sure... I seem to keep hearing the teams telling the drivers to "overtake him now, use the - whatever it's called - overtake button"... what's up with that, how is that not coaching..?
Click to expand...

That's a very good question actually XD
 
RX-7_FD3S
Well let's take Rosberg example, if this rules was in place, he would have to make a drive trough, which is costing like 15 sec. Which is 5 more than the 10 he got last time. With this he would still be 3rd. I dont see the trouble here. As soon as he enter pitlane, engineer tell him to not use 7th gear and he would have been gone again. No need to even stop at his box.

Obviously we dont share the same opinion which is fine for me :D



That's a very good question actually XD
Click to expand...

It's not taking 15 seconds because it takes longer than that to go through the pits, doesn't ensure he'd have finished in the points at all. So it's actually a much bigger loss than you're willing to see it for. 10 seconds post race penalty and doing 55mph on a pit road for 20+ seconds while your rivals are at full speed...I really shouldn't have to draw it out for you.

He'd have not been third and you making this new rule seem find and dandy when it's a damn black and white one size fits all is a bit disturbing to me. This is one of those times where it's not about opinion it's about the ideals and "facts" that some are using to validate their opinions/views. Simply saying it's just an opinion is justified.
 
RX-7_FD3S
Well let's take Rosberg example, if this rules was in place, he would have to make a drive trough, which is costing like 15 sec. Which is 5 more than the 10 he got last time. With this he would still be 3rd. I dont see the trouble here. As soon as he enter pitlane, engineer tell him to not use 7th gear and he would have been gone again. No need to even stop at his box.
Click to expand...

But I'm asking you, as a fan, wouldn't you prefer neither? Wouldn't you have preferred him to be told what he was told, receive no penalty and not be forced through the pits? What do you/I the viewer gain from the circumstances that did occur, or will occur going forward? In that specific example he lost a gear and wasn't likely to challenge Hamilton anyway but on any other day, he might have done. But not if he has to lose 20 seconds driving through the pits to fix an issue that could have been done remotely.

As I say, from a fan POV, this is not a good thing IMO. It's only going to rob us of racing, not give us anything of value.
 
TenEightyOne
They're the same thing, no?
Click to expand...

Eh? No, it's one thing to tell the driver to change brake balance, because the brakes are overheating or to tell him to brake later in that corner, use that gear in this corner, press the overtake button! etc.
Telling a driver about the cars condition is necessary and serves safety, telling him how to actually drive is annoying and should be forbidden. Otherwise they could just remote control the cars and do away with the drivers for good.

If you don't see the difference still, I don't know how to explain it better, but there definitely is a difference and this one rule for all (except for the "overtake button" apperantly) is really bad for F1 overall. They make themselves a joke in the views of many with this...
 
As I said in the last discussion about this making it totally black and white in legalese speak isn't going to be easy but in layman's terms I think it's quite simple. This is what I would do, in layman's.

Allowed:

Performance guidance related to the car settings adjustable by software. Only on a general basis, so telling a driver to change a setting for better performance is ok, telling them to do it only on certain parts of the track isn't as it's coaching.

Reliability related to the car only. If it's a problem related to the driver inputs (eg Brakes failing) tell them what the problem is but not how to solve it unless it's a software change. If it's something they need to change in their driving inputs, it's not allowed, they have to work that out themselves. Eg it's up to Rosberg if he thinks it's better to shift through 7th or stop at 6th.

Not allowed:

Performance related to actually manoeuvring the car (Anything relating to throttle/brake/steering/gear inputs)
Performance related to managing wear of any part of the car.

Probably need a few more clauses and details but that would be the general gist. Putting that into iron clad legalese black and white though, not so easy.
 
Last edited:
(This maybe should be in the unpopular opinions thread, but we are discussing it here, so...)
There should be no radio rules at all !
Teams invest millions to try and win, let them tell the drivers what they want.
F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of technology, let them use it as best they can.
I have no problems with a team trying to get the best out of their man and machine anyway they can.
Just about every other sport in the world has their coach on the sidelines giving instructions, but not in F1 :boggled:
 
I don't care any more I would rather they change the radio rules to how they where, it's just getting stupid and you can't trust the FIA with anything complicated they just end up becoming retarded.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
as usual you'll find a way to paint the governing body as a savior that teams are just trying to manipulate.
Click to expand...
Not at all. I believe that they're as bad as each other.

Look at Rosberg's gearbox failure - no doubt Mercedes thought that telling him to skip seventh gear was within the realm of preventing an imminent failure. But do you really think Rosberg was incapable of figuring out that he needed to shift through seventh all on his own?
 
prisonermonkeys
Not at all. I believe that they're as bad as each other.

Look at Rosberg's gearbox failure - no doubt Mercedes thought that telling him to skip seventh gear was within the realm of preventing an imminent failure. But do you really think Rosberg was incapable of figuring out that he needed to shift through seventh all on his own?
Click to expand...

Yeah, because it's safer to ask the engineer that helps with the understand and outlook of such components on a day to day, rather than him just mash through it and potentially destroy the entire gear box. Not only will he destroy his race, but potentially harm a future race due to having one less gear box.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Not only will he destroy his race, but potentially harm a future race due to having one less gear box.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that gearbox penalties are slightly different to engine penalties. You're allowed a free change if you can demonstrate that the damage was caused during the event - it's only preventative changes that the FIA stamped out.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
It's not taking 15 seconds because it takes longer than that to go through the pits, doesn't ensure he'd have finished in the points at all. So it's actually a much bigger loss than you're willing to see it for. 10 seconds post race penalty and doing 55mph on a pit road for 20+ seconds while your rivals are at full speed...I really shouldn't have to draw it out for you.

He'd have not been third and you making this new rule seem find and dandy when it's a damn black and white one size fits all is a bit disturbing to me. This is one of those times where it's not about opinion it's about the ideals and "facts" that some are using to validate their opinions/views. Simply saying it's just an opinion is justified.
Click to expand...

Nope, it does takes 15 seconds (of course depending on track and GP but this is based on what I remember a regular pit stop was at Silverstone this year), it takes them around 22 seconds for tires stop and they have to stop, stay 2 to 4 seconds and go on again and they wont have to with the new rules, they can just stay at 80 km/h hear the fix, do it and go back at it. The problem is that you're not trying to understand what I said, basically that I'm fine with this rules and I'm fine if they got some sort of penalty if something is wrong with the car and they need to fix it, even if they could fix it directly by talking to the driver or even you know be modern and have wifi on your car that engineer can access and modify whatever they want. But this is a driver sport, not and engineer even.

I do understand your point but I dont agree with it which seems to bother some of you for some reason ^^;

Also you're assuming they will still get 10 sec penalty if they say something during the race, I believe you're wrong too, it would make no sens to make the rule stricter but apply the same penalty. I'm guessing that if they gave such advice now, the car will be disqualified, that's why they said you have either to stop the car or make it go trough the pit lane. But that is just wild speculation I admit. Until it's clarified we dont know what sort of penalty they encounter but I really doubt they kept the 10 sec. penalty at the end of the race.

Samus
But I'm asking you, as a fan, wouldn't you prefer neither?
Wouldn't you have preferred him to be told what he was told, receive no penalty and not be forced through the pits? What do you/I the viewer gain from the circumstances that did occur, or will occur going forward? In that specific example he lost a gear and wasn't likely to challenge Hamilton anyway but on any other day, he might have done. But not if he has to lose 20 seconds driving through the pits to fix an issue that could have been done remotely.

As I say, from a fan POV, this is not a good thing IMO. It's only going to rob us of racing, not give us anything of value.
Click to expand...
As a fan of the sports for many years, it doesnt bother me that a car have to go to the pitlane to fix something that is wrong with it even if there's other mean to fix it. I dont like radio coaching and fixing, I want driver to drive the car, otherwise you can also put all the driving aids back or just simply go to a Formula type where there is no driver but just engineer driving the car and exploiting it to the full. I know I'm probably old school and again I'm fine with it.
 
prisonermonkeys
I'm pretty sure that gearbox penalties are slightly different to engine penalties. You're allowed a free change if you can demonstrate that the damage was caused during the event - it's only preventative changes that the FIA stamped out.
Click to expand...

If Mercedes need to change Rosberg's gearbox for this race they'll incur a 5-place grid penalty, or so they say. The rules aren't black and white but in this case it seems the penalty applies.

LMSCorvetteGT2
Yeah, because it's safer to ask the engineer that helps with the understand and outlook of such components on a day to day, rather than him just mash through it and potentially destroy the entire gear box. Not only will he destroy his race, but potentially harm a future race due to having one less gear box.
Click to expand...

Safer in the current technological climate, but does it get the cars towards the final aim of being simpler to make and manage? That's the whole point of the cuts to radio instructions, at the moment there are justifications for engineers instructing the drivers on how to manage the car and its failures. In my opinion they shouldn't be, if it goes bang then don't build it that way.

If the final aim is to create high-end tech that makes its way to being normal-tech on road cars then self-reliance needs to be developed as much as anything else.
 
Perhaps this should be in a separate F1 rules thread (do we have one of those?), but I think the current rules on radio transmissions are absurd... apart from anything else, they rob the crowd of those golden moments when drivers like Kimi brush them aside, as if he needs instruction from someone who has probably never driven an F1 car in their lives! These kind of restrictions only seem to make situations that are not the fault of the driver (i.e. a technical fault) something that the driver ends up paying for heavily, and that seems really unfair. In the final analysis, it should not be about what the FIA or even the teams want, it should be about what is best for the drivers and for the fans... if some drivers benefit from their team's input, then so be it... but I'm going to hazard a guess and say that the best drivers out there only need their team's input when something beyond their control goes wrong, and not to tell them how to drive a better race.
 
Touring Mars
Perhaps this should be in a separate F1 rules thread (do we have one of those?), but I think the current rules on radio transmissions are absurd... apart from anything else, they rob the crowd of those golden moments when drivers like Kimi brush them aside, as if he needs instruction from someone who has probably never driven an F1 car in their lives! These kind of restrictions only seem to make situations that are not the fault of the driver (i.e. a technical fault) something that the driver ends up paying for heavily, and that seems really unfair. In the final analysis, it should not be about what the FIA or even the teams want, it should be about what is best for the drivers and for the fans... if some drivers benefit from their team's input, then so be it... but I'm going to hazard a guess and say that the best drivers out there only need their team's input when something beyond their control goes wrong, and not to tell them how to drive a better race.
Click to expand...

Nope, Rosberg used to be coached during qualification on what he could do to take the corner faster, others were probably too I just noticed him more than others.
 
Surprising that nobody has posted it yet, but after 1st practise the Mercs were 1.5 seconds clear of the rest of the field (headed by Vettel). Seems their new aero package is working wonders... can't say I'll be tuning in this time though.
 
Friday doesnt usually means anything except for long runs pace and even then it's hard for an outsider to know how much fuel there is in the car.
 
image.jpeg
Cool pic from Fernando Alonso showing Mclaren as potentially the 4th best team this weekend!
 
Hamilton in the wall. Put a wheel on the kerb and it snapped around on him. Went into the barrier sideways a la Verstappen in Monaco and dislodged the tyre wall by about a metre. He managed to get it going again and limp back to the pits, but the lateral shock could hurt his gearbox.

One of the camera angles looks absolutely hilarious; he comes through the corner like the world's worst rally driver.
 
prisonermonkeys
Hamilton in the wall. Put a wheel on the kerb and it snapped around on him. Went into the barrier sideways a la Verstappen in Monaco and dislodged the tyre wall by about a metre. He managed to get it going again and limp back to the pits, but the lateral shock could hurt his gearbox.

One of the camera angles looks absolutely hilarious; he comes through the corner like the world's worst rally driver.
Click to expand...

Someone's nursing a semi.
 

Latest Posts

Back