Seriously I don't understand the people measuring the thrills of a season only on the amount of overtake manoevers made during the year. First of all because there is overtaking and overtaking, for example the datas are gonna count the cases when a front runner would start in last positions for some reason and would begin to make his way through the field, while the backmarkers would make very little opposition. I also recall of statistics from the 2007 European GP where the 15ish positions lost by Markus Winkelhock in 1 lap were all counted as overtaking manoevers... Whereas the Spyker driver was on the lead at the restart with rain tyres while the rest of the field was on the inter, creating a difference of speed of 15-20 seconds a lap.

Monaco 1992 or Imola 2005 are two classic GPs(well, not so much yet for the latter, but it might be in a decade after Alonso and Schumacher retiring from the sport) with no overtaking moves at the front. In fact if they are it's because overtaking was a damn difficult thing to do at Monaco and Imola, and everyone was admiring Alonso's and Senna's abilities to stay in front of a 2-3 seconds faster car, and wondering if Mansell or Schumacher would eventually find a way through. Imagine if Imola or Monaco were easy tracks for overtaking, Mansell and Schumacher would have done the job within a few corners and those GPs would have been forgotten after a few weeks.

Honestly I think 2010 is a pretty much decent season to watch as we have 5 championship contenders grouped in less points than a win, that at 7 GP to go. I guess you'd have to go back to 1981 to see something similar. In the end I won't bother much if all the efforts given to provide more on-track passes kinda failed. F1 isn't all about overtaking IMO. If you'd go back to the early/mid-70s, overtaking hadn't such an importance since there was lots of difference between the cars and the reliability wasn't great at all, so people knew they could eventually win or do well without blocking the driver behind for the whole GP. And this was dangerous thing too, drivers and spectators could actually die if a manoever wouldn't go well, so people were generally giving room to each other.

I never said 2010 was worse - I think it's a cracking season, with not a single dull bit yet. But I felt there was less overtaking (overtaking that mattered, based on skill and racecraft rather than massive car advantages or wet weather) than in 2009 - itself a damn good season.

At least nobody can call F1 boring anymore...

Quote from tristancliffe :

I never said 2010 was worse - I think it's a cracking season, with not a single dull bit yet. But I felt there was less overtaking (overtaking that mattered, based on skill and racecraft rather than massive car advantages or wet weather) than in 2009 - itself a damn good season.

At least nobody can call F1 boring anymore...

It is boring.. We need more random explosions. How about powerups, and teh drivers can drop oil slicks. We need F1 to be less racing, and more like that cartoon Wacky Races...

We talked about it before on IRC but I really can't understand how the position of "nothing happened so it wasn't dangerous" can be defended. Just because the drivers got away with it (and even if Tristan wants to play it down to serve his opinion there could well have been fatalities involved if the cars had touched tyre to tyre) doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous. Think back to when there were no speed limits in pitlane and cars would enter and exit the pitlanes at 100+mph. That was undoubtedly unnecessarily dangerous (because it added nothing to the racing and people who were in pitlane were exposed to more risk). That there were very few accidents in the pitlane in that period doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous, just that everyone involved was lucky. What about track safety? If you have trees lining a circuit and a driver spins off and misses a tree by a fraction of an inch, do you say it's not dangerous because he didn't hit it?

Also, to Tristan,..I like the way you went from "about a foot" to "between 8 inches and one foot". Are your customers happy with that level of accuracy?

Quote from amp88 :

Also, to Tristan,..I like the way you went from "about a foot" to "between 8 inches and one foot". Are your customers happy with that level of accuracy?

Tristans customers are satisfied with only 6 inches.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

It is boring.. We need more random explosions. How about powerups, and teh drivers can drop oil slicks. We need F1 to be less racing, and more like that cartoon Wacky Races...

no, i have the solution.

we need takuma sato back in F1.

Quote from el pibe :

no, i have the solution.

we need takuma sato back in F1.

And Yuji Ide.

Or, reintroduce refuelling, instal 10 different cameras around Ferrari's pit, and enjoy

bhwhaha

what about Luca Bah-d'oh-er?

Quote from el pibe :

bhwhaha

what about Luca Bah-d'oh-er?

Oh yea, mega +1

Next year, let's have Badoer and Ide teaming up at Red Bull, Deletraz and Young at McLaren, Mazzacane and Baumgartner at Ferrari. No imposed line-up for anyone else but they have to carry 50 kg of ballast. Would be cool to watch IMO

I think you all are too hard still on Luca. I'd like to see any of you step into an F1 car and even come within 2 seconds of the leaders (like he did)..

Yes he was off pace compared to everyone else, but no way is he a bad driver. He didn't crash out of his races, which is more that can be said for several F1 drivers.

Quote from amp88 :

just that everyone involved was lucky. What about track safety? If you have trees lining a circuit and a driver spins off and misses a tree by a fraction of an inch, do you say it's not dangerous because he didn't hit it?

That's where i think you are wrong. Those drivers in professional racing are not some internet kiddies, but grown ups (at least mature enough to judge the risk on their own). If Bar doesn't like it, he may as well do touring cars with a full rollcage and all.

So why limiting everything?? Trees - yes, too dangerous, but then, i see no trees on any racing circuits.
What's the next rule?
- You are not allowed to use the whole width of a track?
- Cars going side by side need to have x- amount of space between eachother?

Good point Dustin, everyone's been too harsh on him probably. He certainly wasn't the one to blame, being competitive straight away in a car known to be difficult to drive after a decade of inactivity racing wise and a year of inactivity testing wise is almost impossible to do.

And he was an okay driver in the 90s era, probably underrated sometimes. Okay he didn't score any point, but he's had poor cars also.

But...

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

I'd like to see any of you step into an F1 car and even come within 2 seconds of the leaders (like he did)..

Mkay, if we cannot speak about what we haven't/aren't able to achieve, then you can ban everyone from posting in this section(apart from Tristan and a few others hehe) and suppress the F1 thread.

I get that.. but he didn't do too bad.. most of us would dream to be able to get that fast in an F1 car. There's no saying his performance was slow.. but he did respectable considering there's been a steep decrease in his permitted seat time (testing bans) along with he wasn't in a race situation for a long time. He wasn't dangerous either, didn't cause any wrecks and managed to finish his races.

Quote from amp88 :

What about track safety? If you have trees lining a circuit and a driver spins off and misses a tree by a fraction of an inch, do you say it's not dangerous because he didn't hit it?

theres a difference between a potentially dangerous situation in which all involved are in full control and a potentially dangerous position in which the driver isnt in control

Quote :

Also, to Tristan,..I like the way you went from "about a foot" to "between 8 inches and one foot". Are your customers happy with that level of accuracy?

he restores lancias... 10 cm (i believe the difference between 8 inches and a foot is 4 inches but im not entirely sure since i refuse to learn the details of a system that works on completely arbitrary lengths and number bases) sort tolerance are still way smaller than what any lancia factory ever produced

Quote from JazzOn :

That's where i think you are wrong. Those drivers in professional racing are not some internet kiddies, but grown ups (at least mature enough to judge the risk on their own).

Yeah, that's why there are no crashes ever in professional racing? No rage attacks? No revenge wrecking?

I realise that you can never eliminate all danger from motor racing (and I actually think it would lose some of its appeal if you did), but there needs to be a code of conduct when it comes to driving standards. The fact that we (and seemingly a portion of the F1 paddock) are so divided on this issue means things are not clear enough (either in the way they're written or in the way they can be interpreted). You shouldn't be able to force a competitor over the white lines marking the edge of the track, you should always leave a competitor at least 1 vehicle's width + a certain margin (and that's a difficult definition) and you shouldn't change your line more than once per straight. If people can agree on the certain margin to leave (and that's going to depend on the vehicles and drivers involved to a certain extent) then everyone can drive to the same set of rules.

Quote from Shotglass :

theres a difference between a potentially dangerous situation in which all involved are in full control and a potentially dangerous position in which the driver isnt in control

...and there's a vast difference between each driver independently thinking they're in control and both drivers being in control relative to each other. As we see from the end of the clip Barrichello's car does actually kick up grass and touches a raised lip on the edge of the circuit. At the time the grass is kicked up there is a reasonable amount of room available for Barrichello to move left, but he doesn't use it. Why do you think that is? I think it's because Barrichello doesn't know (and can't know!) what Schumacher is actually going to do. That's the problem.

Quote from amp88 :

...and there's a vast difference between each driver independently thinking they're in control and both drivers being in control relative to each other. As we see from the end of the clip Barrichello's car does actually kick up grass and touches a raised lip on the edge of the circuit. At the time the grass is kicked up there is a reasonable amount of room available for Barrichello to move left, but he doesn't use it. Why do you think that is? I think it's because Barrichello doesn't know (and can't know!) what Schumacher is actually going to do. That's the problem.

were talking about f1 drivers with more than 550 gp races worth of experience between them not some karting rookies

Quote from Shotglass :

were talking about f1 drivers with more than 550 gp races worth of experience between them not some karting rookies

So why did Barrichello not move left to avoid the grass and lip at the edge of the track? Because he wanted to risk doing damage to his tyre/wheel/suspension etc or because he could not (and cannot!) know what Schumacher was going to do?

Quote from amp88 :

Yeah, that's why there are no crashes ever in professional racing? No rage attacks? No revenge wrecking?

Well accidents happens, may it be a missunderstanding or mechanical failure. As a racing driver you are aware of it or better leave that sport.

As for revenge wrecks, well, i don't know any from the top of my head, I don't and havn't seen all races in history, but something like this is indeed not acceptable. But no-one got wrecked in the MSC/BAR situation!?

PS. of course he can not know, but he can guess or look. It's not like they don't know eachother... Unlike some, i think MSC is sane (and it showed as he made space as soon as hes been passed/or the car is alongside.. unlike webber who just keeps his line and waits for the accident, thats what i call rather insane). Again, they are proffessionals and not amatuers.

Quote from JazzOn :

Well accidents happens, may it be a missunderstanding or mechanical failure. As a racing driver you are aware of it or better leave that sport.

As for revenge wrecks, well, i don't know any from the top of my head, I don't and havn't seen all races in history, but something like this is indeed not acceptable.

Senna/Prost 1990 Japanese GP. Turn 1. It's got to be one of the single most controversial collisions in F1 history.

Quote from JazzOn :

But no-one got wrecked in the MSC/BAR situation!?

Urgh, back to this again. Why is the fact that no-one was injured and no damage was done justification for Schumacher's driving? If Barrichello had clipped Schumacher's tyre, flown into the air and landed 150 metres down the track would you be defending Schumacher's driving? Is it really as simple as that for you?

Quote from JazzOn :

PS. of course he can not know, but he can guess or look. It's not like they don't know eachother... Unlike some, i think MSC is sane (and it showed as he made space as soon as hes been passed/or the car is alongside.. unlike webber who just keeps his line and waits for the accident, thats what i call rather insane). Again, they are proffessionals and not amatuers.

Sure, they are professionals and sure they know each other to an extent. What I'm saying is that when they're side-by-side down the main straight and Barrichello is within a foot (just to please Tristan) of collecting the pit wall in a big way they cannot know what each other is thinking. That's why you need to have a well-defined framework of what is and what isn't acceptable.

To be fair Amp.. the male interpretation of a foot is somewhere between 4 to 8 inches...

Quote from amp88 :

Urgh, back to this again. Why is the fact that no-one was injured and no damage was done justification for Schumacher's driving? If Barrichello had clipped Schumacher's tyre, flown into the air and landed 150 metres down the track would you be defending Schumacher's driving? Is it really as simple as that for you?



Sure, they are professionals and sure they know each other to an extent. What I'm saying is that when they're side-by-side down the main straight and Barrichello is within a foot (just to please Tristan) of collecting the pit wall in a big way they cannot know what each other is thinking. That's why you need to have a well-defined framework of what is and what isn't acceptable.

1st, ok make close cockpits and make a cover around the tires. What happens when tires touch has been seen. Do we talk about RL or LFS??

2nd, you seem to want to rule everthing in, which, at some point, gets ridiculous. The rules are just fine now and MSC didn't break them.

I notice you're conveniently skipping over a clear revenge wrecking incident by one of the greatest drivers in the history of motorsport. That's OK, just thought I'd point it out.

Quote from JazzOn :

1st, ok make close cockpits and make a cover around the tires. What happens when tires touch has been seen. Do we talk about RL or LFS??

Closed cockpits aren't a solution to the problem. Not only does covering the wheels go against the "open wheel racing" tag, but it would only shift the problem. Now instead of tyres touching and cars going flying you have cars touching and bodywork/steering/suspension/wheel/tyre damage. It's shifting the problem slightly rather than trying to address the root cause.

Quote from JazzOn :

Do we talk about RL or LFS??

I don't understand this. I'm talking about real life, where cars touching (and particularly tyres touching in open wheel series) have caused many accidents where one or more cars have left the ground. Gilles Villeneuve, for example, killed 2 people and injured 10 when he clipped Ronnie Peterson's car in the 1977 Japanese GP. Obviously we've also seen what can happen with the recent Webber crash.

Quote from JazzOn :

2nd, you seem to want to rule everthing in, which, at some point, gets ridiculous. The rules are just fine now and MSC didn't break them.

Where did I say I want to rule everything in? I think there should be a clear framework for driving conduct where everyone can understand exactly what is allowed and exactly what isn't. Punishments for offences must also be clearly set out, so drivers know what to expect if they breach the rules.

Quote from amp88 :

I notice you're conveniently skipping over a clear revenge wrecking incident by one of the greatest drivers in the history of motorsport. That's OK, just thought I'd point it out.

i already said i don't think its ok!

Quote :

Closed cockpits aren't a solution to the problem. Not only does covering the wheels go against the "open wheel racing" tag, but it would only shift the problem. Now instead of tyres touching and cars going flying you have cars touching and bodywork/steering/suspension/wheel/tyre damage. It's shifting the problem slightly rather than trying to address the root cause.

It was sarcasm... OW have a certain risk. If one doesn't like it he should leave, don't you think?
What would be your suggestion to make things "safer"?

Quote :

I don't understand this. I'm talking about real life, where cars touching (and particularly tyres touching in open wheel series) have caused many accidents where one or more cars have left the ground. Gilles Villeneuve, for example, killed 2 people and injured 10 when he clipped Ronnie Peterson's car in the 1977 Japanese GP. Obviously we've also seen what can happen with the recent Webber crash.

We have 2010 not 1977... things have changed, Tracks got safer...

Webber is stupid and drove into the back of a backmarker (if you mean that incedent) - punish him.

MSC/BAR did not touch, because they know what they are doing.. rest is speculations and assumptions.

Quote :

Where did I say I want to rule everything in? I think there should be a clear framework for driving conduct where everyone can understand exactly what is allowed and exactly what isn't. Punishments for offences must also be clearly set out, so drivers know what to expect if they breach the rules.

He got a penalty. What's left?

All i'm saying is what i already said. At some point rules are getting ridiculous.

Quote from amp88 :

So why did Barrichello not move left to avoid the grass and lip at the edge of the track? Because he wanted to risk doing damage to his tyre/wheel/suspension etc or because he could not (and cannot!) know what Schumacher was going to do?

if you actually watch the onboard replay youll see that rubens was turning left before he even cleared the wall an certainly before he (may have) clipped the grass

Quote from JazzOn :

i already said i don't think its ok!

It's difficult for me to make sense of some of your English.

Quote from JazzOn :

It was sarcasm... OW have a certain risk. If one doesn't like it he should leave, don't you think?

If a person is clearly dangerous it should be that person who should be punished, not the person or people he is dangerous towards.

Quote from JazzOn :

What would be your suggestion to make things "safer"?

This:

Quote from amp88 :

I think there should be a clear framework for driving conduct where everyone can understand exactly what is allowed and exactly what isn't. Punishments for offences must also be clearly set out, so drivers know what to expect if they breach the rules.

Quote from JazzOn :

We have 2010 not 1977... things have changed, Tracks got safer...

Track safety has definitely improved, yes. Are people still in danger when cars fly into the air because they touch? Yes. So, let's try and limit the number of flying cars (and not through sheer luck, through action).

Quote from JazzOn :

Webber is stupid and drove into the back of a backmarker (if you mean that incedent) - punish him.

I agree, Webber misjudged the situation and should have been punished for it.

Quote from JazzOn :

MSC/BAR did not touch, because they know what they are doing.. rest is speculations and assumptions.

It really didn't sound like Barrichello knew what Schumacher was doing. If one driver can't know what his competitors are likely to do (i.e. within regulations) then how can you say they know what they are doing (collectively).

Quote from JazzOn :

He got a penalty. What's left?

Clarify the situation, make things more open to all teams. We still have some people in the paddock saying Schumacher was right, others saying he was wrong. They're both arguing from the same "rulebook". How can that be? Are the rules unclear or open to interpretation? Fix them, clarify things...

Quote from JazzOn :

All i'm saying is what i already said. At some point rules are getting ridiculous.

Rules are only ridiculous when they do nothing to improve the sport (whether that's driver/fan safety, on track action etc). Clarifying driver conduct rules so the driver's know what they can and can't do increases driver and fan safety and should make the on track action cleaner and lead to less post-race penalties (which people generally don't like).

Quote from Shotglass :

if you actually watch the onboard replay youll see that rubens was turning left before he even cleared the wall an certainly before he (may have) clipped the grass

He wasn't travelling parallel to the pitwall when he started turning left though. And if you still don't acknowledge he clipped the grass then there's no point in continuing this debate because you're not watching the same thing I am.