Back markers

[flynfrog]

Looking back at all of the near misses over the weekend and how bad its bound to be in Monaco how about a rule that says when you get lapped twice you are done. Put it in the garage. I know when I worked for an indy team we were several laps down and the leaders were coming up on us so we pulled the car into the pit to keep from effecting the leaders.

[WhiteBlue]

You can't do this. It is unsporting to treat back markers any different. They rely on finishing the race to make progress, get classified, make points and attract sponsors. No way you get such a rule across the F1 Commission.

[jon-mullen]

Yes, it's unfortunate that they're in the race despite having no chance of winning, but their entries were accepted and that's that, they've got every right to be on track. With no testing and the HRT drivers being new, every lap counts for them. And what they've done so far is an accomplishment, even if they are backmarkers.

If anyone was interested, here's how the 107% rule would look, with a time jump between the first two races and the most recent. I believe the rule compared a lap from the whole session to the pole lap, but that doesn't make as much sense with this quali format (track getting faster, weather, etc.), so I put both Q1 and pole.

[nipo]

Sorry I might sound like an idiot - They still qualify even though they are off 107%??

[flynfrog]

You can't do this. It is unsporting to treat back markers any different. They rely on finishing the race to make progress, get classified, make points and attract sponsors. No way you get such a rule across the F1 Commission.

sure you could get it through call it a safety problem works for every thing else.

The Vettel Hamilton pass could have ended very badly.

[mx_tifoso]

Hopefully they will gain some significant speed by next season which will render them less 'dangerous'.

But force a DNF upon them once they get lapped twice? That's incredibly rude as a slap in the face. They've spent millions and worked their butts off to get there, why should they quit? A blue flag is sufficient IMO. As other people have mentioned, other series such as Le Mans have this issue between categories without problems.

[WhiteBlue]

You can't do this. It is unsporting to treat back markers any different. They rely on finishing the race to make progress, get classified, make points and attract sponsors. No way you get such a rule across the F1 Commission.

sure you could get it through call it a safety problem works for every thing else.

The Vettel Hamilton pass could have ended very badly.

I invite you to study the pass in the thread "Who owns the racing line". Lucas Di Grassi pretty much left the track to avoid any interference with the pass. You cannot bring a worse example of the behavior of a back marker to make your point. You have got no leg to stand on regarding safety.

[Belatti]

Sorry but I get really mad every time I read that the back markers are a problem. They are not a problem but a part of the game. A better driver deals better with lapping slower cars. Then good for him!

That Indy rule flyn proposes is the dumbest thing I have heard, sorry Flyn, you know I appreciate you anyways.

Remeber Irvine/Senna in 93 or Schlesser/Senna in 88. Even Argentinian driver Fontana said his Ferrari powered team asked him to let Schumacher pass and block Villeneuve in Jerez 97. He really hated it but wanted to retain his seat in Sauber, something he couldnt achieve later. Dirty and unfair as a referee mistake in Football, but a part of the game.

[flynfrog]

You can't do this. It is unsporting to treat back markers any different. They rely on finishing the race to make progress, get classified, make points and attract sponsors. No way you get such a rule across the F1 Commission.

sure you could get it through call it a safety problem works for every thing else.

The Vettel Hamilton pass could have ended very badly.

I invite you to study the pass in the thread "Who owns the racing line". Lucas Di Grassi pretty much left the track to avoid any interference with the pass. You cannot bring a worse example of the behavior of a back marker to make your point. You have got no leg to stand on regarding safety.

It was reading this thread that brought that up in my mind. Imagine how long we would have to listen to the Hamilton support group of Di Grassi had not been able to get over and Lewis repeats his pit lane driving on the track. It would be one thing if they were running at a reasonable pace but as Jon points out above some of them don't even make the 107% rule.

[flynfrog]

Sorry but I get really mad every time I read that the back markers are a problem. They are not a problem but a part of the game. A better driver deals better with lapping slower cars. Then good for him!

That Indy rule flyn proposes is the dumbest thing I have heard, sorry Flyn, you know I appreciate you anyways.

Remeber Irvine/Senna in 93 or Schlesser/Senna in 88. Even Argentinian driver Fontana said his Ferrari powered team asked him to let Schumacher pass and block Villeneuve in Jerez 97. He really hated it but wanted to retain his seat in Sauber, something he couldnt achieve later. Dirty and unfair as a referee mistake in Football, but a part of the game.

It was not a rule Belatti They race for the championship was coming up behind us we were in last a few laps down. So rather than lap for the sake of lapping possibly effecting the outcome of championship we pulled off. More of a gentleman thing really.

[WhiteBlue]

The 107% rule was introduced in 1996 when teams were still running garagista budgets. There was no shortage of new teams and the new teams could rise to the top in some years. Jordan was founded in 1991 and rose to 3. place in the championship in 1999. Just a few years after the 107% rule was introduced it was obsolete already because there were no surplus private teams any more in F1. Privateers were in a steep decline because manufacturers were spending 2 billion $ on their works teams. Private teams which were starting on budgets like 20-30 million $ had no chance at all to compete with giants that had 500 mil+ budgets. I don't remember exactly when they had to abandon the 107% rule but it was definitely in the early 2000 years. Because F1 for a long time did not care about reasonable cost control it is now necessary to nurse a new generation of private teams. It will take some time until they have picked up the baton and run with the speed of the older teams.

[Paul]

It was abandoned when one-lap qualifying was introduced.

[WhiteBlue]

It was abandoned when one-lap qualifying was introduced.

Yep, 2003! By that time the privateers were going down like lead balloons. Jordan was 9th of the championship and had to sell the team 2005.

[Belatti]

It was not a rule Belatti They race for the championship was coming up behind us we were in last a few laps down. So rather than lap for the sake of lapping possibly effecting the outcome of championship we pulled off. More of a gentleman thing really.

I know it was not a rule, I meant you proposed a rule.

[Caito]

To improve they need money, for money you need sponsors, and for sponsors you need tv exposure. I think they get the most tv exposure when they're being lapped. You will send them to a never ending loop in which they can only lose.

They get out of the races, lose sponsors, lose money, which makes them be even worse for the next race and so on.


I believe they should just be better advised by radio so to move off the line earlier, so the fast ones can pass them with more confidence.