Silly Rules Thread

[ukfan758]

That would be an even sillier implementation of DRS than we have now, because surely that would be equivalent to them both not having DRS at all!



I'd agree that would be better - but then it wouldn't be DRS anymore.

I think DRS is more a philosophy than a specific system, if that makes any sense - that philosophy being "a car running behind should be given an artificial advantage over the car in front", and the idea of a moving wing simply being the chosen method of achieving that. A push to pass system doesn't do this because there's equality between drivers - they all have the same amount of it, and can all use it wherevever they want. There's a different purpose behind such a system.

So suggesting a push-to-pass style implementation, whilst a great idea, isn't really a "modification" to DRS - it changes it into something else entirely.


I'm not sure if this would be an improvement, but I've always wondered what would happen if DRS worked in a sort-of opposite manner to how it does now - where the driver running behind can use it wherever they want on the track except for the usual DRS zones on the big straights. In my head I'd like to think this would mean they could run closer than usual to the car in front all the way round the lap (possibly allowing overtakes in more adventurous places), thus making an overtake on the long straights easier, but with the overtake itself being all their own work. Would also bring back the challenge of using DRS as early as possible out of corners like we used to see in 2011 qualifying. But with DRS being ineffective at lower speeds I don't know if this actually would work better in reality.

That is a great idea, I've wondered how DRS would work if it was used only when you're more than 1.5 or 2 seconds behind the car in front (the leader would not be able to use DRS with lapped cars). In my mind, this would the cars bunched together instead of spreading out while having more natural overtaking. For people here, would this proposal make overtaking easier or difficult?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Australian GT has a stupid one: it's a time-sensitive race with a compulsory pit stop. The pits are only open between 40% and 60% of the race distance. The series is a multi-class format for professional and amateur drivers, so to account for this, professional drivers cannot do more than 55% of the race distance before swapping with their team-mate. On top of this, there is a minimum pit stop time - like in Formula E - which is calculated based on driver classification, qualifying position and previous race results from the meeting. If you have no idea what is going on, neither do the commentators.

I hate this kind of regulation because it deliberately manipulates the outcome. It's designed to create the closest finishes possible because organisers are apparently terrified of the thought that audiences will tune out if races aren't decided by a tenth of a second. Which in the case of Australian GT, is ironic because the cars are devastatingly gorgeous to begin with.

Formula One seems to be paralysed by the same fear. All of it is based on the faulty assumption that audiences want to see constant passing, and that if there aren't four moves in a lap, people will tune out. So they tinker with the periphery and hope for the best. It doesn't help that the teans have a say in the regulations and will shoot down any regulation changes that threaten their position.

The real tragedy is that they're actually really close to getting it right. I don't think that the fans want to see constant passing. Rather, I think that they want to see the possibility of passing. The regulators fail to realise that a driver successfully defending his position can be just as exciting as a driver successfully passing another.

All of it is moot because the works teams limit the software that their customer teams use to prevent them from beating the works team on merit.

 

[GTracer38]

The system used in AusGT is catered to the 'gentlemen' drivers (and car owners), not the audience. It does what it's meant to do, which is give the slower drivers a chance to compete In races (Lago won yesterday), but doesn't disadvantage Pro's significantly over the year to cause an issue (Mies won last year's title).

Whilst it would be silly in a 'pro' driver series, it is the best they've managed to implement and keeps with their 'gentlemen' driver series.

The commentators have been hopeless this weekend (for AusGT). The timing issues haven't helped their case either.

 

[twitcher]

The real tragedy is that they're actually really close to getting it right. I don't think that the fans want to see constant passing. Rather, I think that they want to see the possibility of passing. The regulators fail to realise that a driver successfully defending his position can be just as exciting as a driver successfully passing another.

All of it is moot because the works teams limit the software that their customer teams use to prevent them from beating the works team on merit.

Nail on the head right there 👍