Safety Cars and Fairness

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
560
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Perhaps there should be a question as to whether a VSC / SC is even needed in all cases. In Monza, Ricciardo's car was out of the way, on the inside of the circuit and unlikely to be a risk to anyone. Why not just leave it there and carry on? If absolutely necessary, wave a yellow to remind the drivers to be a bit more careful in that mini-sector. Some circuits will have sections of track like that where a car can be left against the barriers and be little risk to other cars. Obviously, you wouldn't do it midway down a straight (although one might argue that it would be safe to do so if it's on grass and well back from the track), as it would affect overtaking opportunities, but it could be done in certain places. Put it in the race director's notes and even encourage the drivers to use that location if they have to park the car.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
560
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:03 pm
So, in which way was a finish under the safety car unfair or underwhelming? The race was done for a good bunch of laps before that. I’m of the opinion that, in contrast to most sports, the exciting bit of F1 is the first few laps, not the last.

The race was done.
In Monza, a more efficiently run SC could have had Charles immediately behind Max with perhaps one lap to run. That's not "race is over" territory. Had Danny's car expired even two laps earlier, we'd have certainly had that single lap race to the line. We have, after all, had it before.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

Jolle
Jolle
132
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

nokivasara wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:15 pm
Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:03 pm
So, in which way was a finish under the safety car unfair or underwhelming? The race was done for a good bunch of laps before that. I’m of the opinion that, in contrast to most sports, the exciting bit of F1 is the first few laps, not the last.

The race was done.
Is this directed at me (the post above yours)?
I don't think it was unfair or underwhelming at all. Accindents and retirements happen, sometimes the SC is deployed, sometimes it isn't needed.
My take on making the unlapping easier was just in general, not directed at the situation in Monza.
it was directed to the forum in general. There seems to be a wish to have races that are done for after 90%+ of the laps, restarted of reset for just a lap or two. Which, in my opinion is pretty unfair.

Last GP last year, what if Latifi hadn't crashed? race would have finished with the standings from before that incident. The race was done and dusted. Same with Monza. Ten laps before the end it was pretty clear that Leclerc wouldn't be able to do anything about Verstappen and Russell would stay third, etc etc etc.

Having a race reset for just a lap or two is very showmanship in my opinion.

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
560
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:19 pm
it was directed to the forum in general. There seems to be a wish to have races that are done for after 90%+ of the laps, restarted of reset for just a lap or two. Which, in my opinion is pretty unfair.
I've said in the past that I think SCs are unfair at any time in the race. How often have we seen a race leader work hard to get a multi-second lead only to have the pack back on his tail because of a SC?

The only way to make this "fair" is to release the cars at time intervals equivalent to those before the SC was put out on track.

I don't see why they can't just use a multi-level VSC. Have a single VSC where they go at a 40% reduced delta as currently, and then a double VSC where they go at something like pit lane speed. The drivers can drive to deltas in this manner - they do it already with the VSC - and it means that the race is nullified, not reset as in the case of the current SC, so drivers keep their places and gaps. It gets rid of all of the accusations of bias / unfairness other than possibly the exact timing of the start/end of the VSC that we already have and will always have.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

wesley123
wesley123
198
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:03 pm
So, in which way was a finish under the safety car unfair or underwhelming? The race was done for a good bunch of laps before that. I’m of the opinion that, in contrast to most sports, the exciting bit of F1 is the first few laps, not the last.

The race was done.
This really makes it sound like procedures can just be altered just because the "race was done".

I haven't watched the race, nor do I have any clue what actually happened with the safetycar. But using a "race was done" as if it is a valid argument to wave away the situation just sets precedent and makes it very clear what is wrong with the sport.

The race is done once the flag is waved, not anywhere before that, nor is it because anyone was ahead by a larger margin.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

Jolle
Jolle
132
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

wesley123 wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:04 pm
Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:03 pm
So, in which way was a finish under the safety car unfair or underwhelming? The race was done for a good bunch of laps before that. I’m of the opinion that, in contrast to most sports, the exciting bit of F1 is the first few laps, not the last.

The race was done.
This really makes it sound like procedures can just be altered just because the "race was done".

I haven't watched the race, nor do I have any clue what actually happened with the safetycar. But using a "race was done" as if it is a valid argument to wave away the situation just sets precedent and makes it very clear what is wrong with the sport.

The race is done once the flag is waved, not anywhere before that, nor is it because anyone was ahead by a larger margin.
“The race was done” like, it was clear who was the fastest of the day, who had their race in order. (Most of the) drivers were in cruise mode and just riding out the last few laps.
Without a safety car the race would have ended in the same order as now (minus ric of course). Having procedures altered so that a safety car can be shorter or there would be a sprint race of one or two laps seems a bit odd when one team/driver already is 3-0 ahead with 5 minutes to play.

wesley123
wesley123
198
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:13 pm
wesley123 wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:04 pm
This really makes it sound like procedures can just be altered just because the "race was done".

I haven't watched the race, nor do I have any clue what actually happened with the safetycar. But using a "race was done" as if it is a valid argument to wave away the situation just sets precedent and makes it very clear what is wrong with the sport.

The race is done once the flag is waved, not anywhere before that, nor is it because anyone was ahead by a larger margin.
“The race was done” like, it was clear who was the fastest of the day, who had their race in order. (Most of the) drivers were in cruise mode and just riding out the last few laps.
So to be clear, you'd be fine if they just randomly waved the checkered flag in the middle of the race, because "the race is done"?

It really seems like a weird and unreasonable justification to not follow procedure. It's essentially just wasting everyones time.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

Jolle
Jolle
132
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

wesley123 wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:01 pm
Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:13 pm
wesley123 wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:04 pm
This really makes it sound like procedures can just be altered just because the "race was done".

I haven't watched the race, nor do I have any clue what actually happened with the safetycar. But using a "race was done" as if it is a valid argument to wave away the situation just sets precedent and makes it very clear what is wrong with the sport.

The race is done once the flag is waved, not anywhere before that, nor is it because anyone was ahead by a larger margin.
“The race was done” like, it was clear who was the fastest of the day, who had their race in order. (Most of the) drivers were in cruise mode and just riding out the last few laps.
So to be clear, you'd be fine if they just randomly waved the checkered flag in the middle of the race, because "the race is done"?

It really seems like a weird and unreasonable justification to not follow procedure. It's essentially just wasting everyones time.
They did follow procedures now did they? It’s more that every time there is a yellow at the last qualifying run or a safety car everyone wants to change everything to have a spring of a lap or something

wesley123
wesley123
198
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:15 pm
wesley123 wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:01 pm
Jolle wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:13 pm


“The race was done” like, it was clear who was the fastest of the day, who had their race in order. (Most of the) drivers were in cruise mode and just riding out the last few laps.
So to be clear, you'd be fine if they just randomly waved the checkered flag in the middle of the race, because "the race is done"?

It really seems like a weird and unreasonable justification to not follow procedure. It's essentially just wasting everyones time.
They did follow procedures now did they? It’s more that every time there is a yellow at the last qualifying run or a safety car everyone wants to change everything to have a spring of a lap or something
It seems rather unreasonable to use "the race is done" as an argument to not have the discussion. It is clear, and completely unsurprising, that the discussion isn't done after this and prior events.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

feni_remmen
feni_remmen
0
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

I’ve find this issue so frustrating.
Just impose a much slower pit lane speed limit when the virtual safety car is activated. Make the transit time equivalent. Instead of 80, make it 40 or whatever it needs to be. The driver needn’t do anything differently. It can be in the software.
- Pit lane speed limit = X
- Virtual safety car + pit lane speed limit = X-40

As for allowing lapped cars to overtake and unlap. 🤦🏾‍♀️
Its great to see exciting racing, but not at the cost of fairness (f1 irony appreciated)…
I’d rather see an 80 lap demonstration, as opposed to an undeserved victory.

User avatar
henry
315
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

feni_remmen wrote:
Sat Sep 17, 2022 6:01 am
I’ve find this issue so frustrating.
Just impose a much slower pit lane speed limit when the virtual safety car is activated. Make the transit time equivalent. Instead of 80, make it 40 or whatever it needs to be. The driver needn’t do anything differently. It can be in the software.
- Pit lane speed limit = X
- Virtual safety car + pit lane speed limit = X-40

As for allowing lapped cars to overtake and unlap. 🤦🏾‍♀️
Its great to see exciting racing, but not at the cost of fairness (f1 irony appreciated)…
I’d rather see an 80 lap demonstration, as opposed to an undeserved victory.
Excellent idea for pit lane speed. As you say, nothing changes, except the driver has to slow a little more on pit entry. Everything else stays the same, it even accommodates stacking.

I also agree on the lapped cars. If a driver has done the work, and suffered the time loss, in lapping cars why should a competitor have that task removed. It would be enough benefit that the lapped cars are less spread out.

I would also like to see the pit lane closed between the SC being signalled and the cars gathered behind it.

As for rebuilding and returning cars under a red. If you’ve damaged your car that’s a fail.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
hollus
Moderator
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:45 pm
...
I don't see why they can't just use a multi-level VSC. Have a single VSC where they go at a 40% reduced delta as currently, and then a double VSC where they go at something like pit lane speed. The drivers can drive to deltas in this manner...
In this particular case, that would have been a nice option. Not FOR the SC, but INSTEAD of the safety car. There was no need to have the safety car out in an incident which left an uninjured driver walking home and a car outside the tarmac needing a crane or a good dolly and push.
If the other cars had been circulating, circuit wide, at 60 km/h, there would have been no risks, no close calls, no problems for rolling that crane in and that crane plus car out. Overtaking is forbidden anyways.

I guess the problem is that while a pit lane limited would have been better cleaner and faster than a SC, in good weather, in an open circuit with excellent visibility... it becomes a question of grade and interpretation at some point (Rainy Fuji being the other extreme of course).
So the SC and the gap it creates is needed in many cases.
But for this incident, Car stopped ---> VSC ---> pit lane speeds would have been more than enough.

Can these cars run for minutes on the pit lane limiter?
I would like to see a paleontologist.

User avatar
Sieper
68
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:19 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

I recently explained my father (doesn’t follow F1) the current SC concept and he got angry, he thought it very unfair. I said, that is racing, sometimes you get an unfair advantage. Sometimes for you, sometimes against you.
Controversy does not have a short memory.

User avatar
henry
315
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

Sieper wrote:
Sat Sep 17, 2022 10:46 am
I recently explained my father (doesn’t follow F1) the current SC concept and he got angry, he thought it very unfair. I said, that is racing, sometimes you get an unfair advantage. Sometimes for you, sometimes against you.
To be “fair” the rules should seek to minimise offset advantages. They don’t. In fact the SC rules seek to maximise the offset, the gains from field compression , “free” pit stops and lapped runner removal are hugely to the advantage of a runner who is far behind their competitor in front.

And if the “sometimes” results in reallocation of a one off result with no opportunity for redress your final point is not really valid.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
Sieper
68
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:19 pm

Re: Safety Cars and Fairness

Post

henry wrote:
Sat Sep 17, 2022 11:42 am
Sieper wrote:
Sat Sep 17, 2022 10:46 am
I recently explained my father (doesn’t follow F1) the current SC concept and he got angry, he thought it very unfair. I said, that is racing, sometimes you get an unfair advantage. Sometimes for you, sometimes against you.
To be “fair” the rules should seek to minimise offset advantages. They don’t. In fact the SC rules seek to maximise the offset, the gains from field compression , “free” pit stops and lapped runner removal are hugely to the advantage of a runner who is far behind their competitor in front.

And if the “sometimes” results in reallocation of a one off result with no opportunity for redress your final point is not really valid.
Are you my father? :D

Yes, I agree they mostly benefit the people behind. I never said anything to the contrary. One would almost think this is intended?
Controversy does not have a short memory.