Standing restarts, radio ban & double points dropped

75 comments on “Standing restarts, radio ban & double points dropped”

1. 

   Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
   27th November 2014, 0:07

   Best F1 Fanatic round-up ever?!
   1. 

      omarr-pepper
      27th November 2014, 1:46

      @collettdumbletonhall I’m still holding my breath for Jules or Michael’s good news.
      1. 

         Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
         27th November 2014, 1:54

         Yeah, unfortunately though that hasn’t happened yet. This is certainly the best round-up I have ever read.
   2. 

      Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty)
      27th November 2014, 3:11

      @collettdumbletonhall For including the F1 metrics article, yes! I’m glad the ‘in-season political fighting’ rules were all dropped, but nothing has changed on helping the small teams yet..
      1. 

         Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
         27th November 2014, 10:56

         If Schumacher and Bianchi had good news released and the smaller teams had been given a fairer a share of revenue then I wouldn’t be asking if this was the best round-up.
   3. 

      John H (@john-h)
      27th November 2014, 9:23

      Pretty much. Good news at last!!
2. 

   Strontium (@strontium)
   27th November 2014, 0:10

   YES! Fantastic news. All three of those needed to go. Radio ban, while I understanding coaching during the race is wrong, drivers need the information.

   Standing restarts, well, what more needs saying. And double points.. Just…..

   The only thing I don’t understand is why Caterham need permission to use a modified version of this year’s car. Surely, provided it meets the regulations, they can use the design again.
   1. 

      BJ (@beejis60)
      27th November 2014, 6:31

      The nose doesn’t meet 2015 regulations.
      1. 

         BJ (@beejis60)
         27th November 2014, 6:32

         @strontium
      2. 

         Strontium (@strontium)
         27th November 2014, 19:04

         @beejis60 hence why it would be a modified version.
   2. 

      Michel S. (@hircus)
      27th November 2014, 8:04

      Also, Renault is changing their engine packaging, and the rule requiring manufacturers to supply the same engine spec to all their teams, it appears is overly rigid — said customer can’t opt to run the previous year’s engines even though they are still regulation-compliant. Without special dispensations…

      (Granted, I could imagine a scenario whereby were customers be allowed to run older specs, smaller teams would be pressured by their suppliers to claim they prefer the older engines, just to simplify the manufacturers’ supply chain …)
      1. 

         Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
         27th November 2014, 8:31

         Yes – a variety of old engines from Cosworth was the lifeblood of the small teams in the 90s – those teams didn’t have a great reputation for lasting long, but at least they could exist and compete because they weren’t paying a fortune for their engines. I guess in the 70s the power units were more off-the-shelf and you’d take them off to your favourite tuner.

         It’s a shame a whole F1 Commission meeting was used up getting rid of rules that should never have been there in the first place, so there’s nothing much new!
         1. 

            Baron (@baron)
            27th November 2014, 12:55

            £25K for a rebuild!
      2. 

         anon
         27th November 2014, 20:10

         @Michel S., the other issue is that some manufacturers would simply refuse point blank to even give smaller teams the option of purchasing a more up to date specification engine because it could then be used as a means of ensuring that a customer team couldn’t compete with the manufacturer backed entities. That was one of the driving forces behind the requirement to supply teams with the same spec engine.

         @bullfrog, whilst the Cosworth DFV was closer to being an “off the shelf” item, Cosworth did also differentiate between certain levels of customer. There were times when Cosworth would offer a “customer” engine to a small entrant, with the more powerful “works” engines being restricted only to the largest teams (particularly Lotus – their early association with Cosworth meant that they tended to be given priority for updated engines over their rivals, even when their rivals were paying the same amount for those engines).
3. 

   f12007v (@f1fan-2000)
   27th November 2014, 0:10

   I still think that the radio ban isnt as bad as double points and standing restarts and wont mind if it is kept for next year.
   1. 

      hunocsi (@hunocsi)
      27th November 2014, 1:04

      What kind of radio ban do you mean? The one regarding driving that is used since Singapore or the one regarding the technical side which – as it stands now – won’t even come next year?
      1. 

         matiascasali (@matiascasali)
         27th November 2014, 3:22

         does anyone remember the time were the radio messages were highly encripted and no team knew what was the other team talking too?
   2. 

      JCost (@jcost)
      27th November 2014, 6:11

      Radio ban was impossible to police and its ban did not improve racing that much…
   3. 

      petebaldwin (@)
      27th November 2014, 10:58

      @f1fan-2000 Radio ban is still in place – just not being extended as previously planned. It sounds like the current rules will remain.
4. 

   McL88AsAp (@deongunner)
   27th November 2014, 0:13

   Now with those silly rules dropped, lets hope Caterham and Marussia will race again and Red Bull along with Williams will be a lot closer with Mercedes compare to this year
5. 

   Harald
   27th November 2014, 0:51

   Nice to drop the worst rules, but unsporting and illogical to keep the one where lapped cars in safety car periods must leave their natural positions and waste our time by going around the lap to join the back of the field.

   I would say it’s even unsafe for track workers to have loose cars coming outside the pack like that.
   1. 

      Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
      27th November 2014, 8:40

      They didn’t even try the slow zones properly. One quick test at the end of a practice session and they decided “no, doesn’t work, we’re not having that”.
   2. 

      hzh (@hzh00)
      27th November 2014, 9:16

      I was against proposing that lapped cars drop back the field instead of doing a lap and rejoining the field as this might give them an extra lap of fuel advantage. What I think would be best in this case is that the lapped cars drop back and the 100 kg total fuel amount allowed per race be reduced by an amount that is equivalent to one lap average fuel consumption in the corresponding race. In that case, the advantage of having extra fuel is neutralized and the saftey car duration is minimized and the race can resume as soon as possible. This can also prevent having loose cars on the track trying to rejoin the field as fast as they can.
      1. 

         Oeiiiiiiiiiiii! (another davidnotcoulthard account) (@)
         27th November 2014, 14:41

         @hz00
      2. 

         Oeiiiiiiiiiiii! (another davidnotcoulthard account) (@)
         27th November 2014, 14:42

         @hzh00 They’d still run 1 fewer lap and not counted as such (which is unfair) – and with heavier fuel.
         1. 

            hzh (@hzh00)
            27th November 2014, 16:08

            In my opinion, such a slight disadvantage can be tolerated by a car which is already at a very big disadvantage by being a lap down.
      3. 

         JKorz
         27th November 2014, 22:24

         How about they just let them drop back to the back if they have been lapped, who cares about them getting an extra lap of fuel? They are already a lap behind everyone, its like kicking a man when he’s down if you ask me.
         Didn’t they do that in the old days?
         Not many things irritate me as much in f1 as the stupidity of having to wait for the slowest cars in the race to catch up. Martin Brundle always moans about it too which makes me chuckle.
      4. 

         The Abbinator (@abbinator)
         28th November 2014, 8:26

         I say just apply blue flags during a SC — problem solved. Lapped cars drop back under double yellows when safe to do so and maintain race position. So what if they are carrying one more lap of fuel? It’s a disadvantage to carry the extra weight and allows them to push more at the back instead of fuel saving. Sure, they do one less lap, but they get out of the way of the faster runners and it doesn’t prolong to SC period and you don’t get stragglers on track when the marshals are trying to clean the track. Disadvantage scenario — a lapped Sauber (for example) who was just seconds behind his team mate ultimately drops behind his team mate who had not been lapped yet – but that’s racing, and it would allow for the lapped car to have a close battle with the rival to unlap themselves. Basically a bit of injustice at the back of the pack is not a big deal as they would all be out of the points anyway…
   3. 

      Mashiat (@mashiat)
      27th November 2014, 11:55

      @harald They have to do that. Then a car would do 1 lap less than his rivals and even if he goes to finish 5th, he won’t be, because he’ll have to finish another lap, and it will be too confusing.
      1. 

         Tony Hamilton (@tonybananas)
         27th November 2014, 16:22

         But any car that is lapped during a race completes less laps than those that aren’t lapped and so has a fuel advantage, so what’s the difference under safety car?
   4. 

      Harald
      27th November 2014, 23:43

      My point was that the whole rule about lapped cars is useless to begin with and should be dropped.

      The point of the rule is supposedly to make it more of a ‘show’ to have the lapped cars out of the way for the ‘contenders’ after the restart, but as with the other ‘show’ rules that was scrapped now, this one should go too.

      It’s anyway deeply unfair that the lapped cars be moved out of the way to give the lead chasing pack even more of an advantage than what they already get with the field bunching up.
6. 

   hunocsi (@hunocsi)
   27th November 2014, 1:02

   “From the forum

   The first name is confirmed on the 2015 GP2 grid”

   Arthur Pic staying at Campos was already confirmed two weeks ago.
   http://www.paddockscout.com/arthur-pic-sticks-with-campos-racing-for-2015/

   And apparently Negrao stays at Arden as well.
   http://grandepremio.uol.com.br/gp2/noticias/negrao-renova-com-equipe-arden-e-assegura-lugar-no-grid-de-2015-para-segunda-temporada-na-gp2
7. 

   Aldoid
   27th November 2014, 1:42

   I’m happy we’ve heard the end (for now) of double points & standing restarts, but I was actually in favor of the radio ban from the driver coaching point of view. I don’t think the drivers should need any help from the pit wall on how to drive, especially with relation to specifics on matching what their teammate is doing. I’ve always viewed a driver’s race craft as being tantamount to intellectual property, & don’t think it’s fair for the guys on the other side of the garage to pick one driver’s pocket, so to speak, & then use that info to prop up a lesser driver incapable of getting the available lap time on his own. Anything the drivers themselves glean from studying telemetry etc is fair game, but I’ve never been a supporter of driver coaching on the fly by way of him being told exactly how & where his teammate has the upper hand. I don’t even mind it being done in the free practice sessions as that is a time for learning, but come qualifying & race day when there are grid positions & points to play for, I firmly believe they should stand on their own, & win or lose by their own abilities, or lack thereof. As Kimi once said when asked about helping Grosjean (& I’m paraphrasing) this is Formula 1: If you need help from your teammate, you’re probably not quite ready to play with the big boys.
   1. 

      James Devon (@tata)
      27th November 2014, 3:59

      “If you need help from your teammate, you’re probably not quite ready to play with the big boys.”
      I like that quote from Kimi. I also think the radio ban was a right decision. I couldn’t understand what MercedesAmgF1 were doing with the kind of instructions they were giving their drivers before the ban. I think they over did it.
      I have always beleived that there is a reason why drivers like Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, Senna and whoever else, is or was famous in F1. They have special gifts, talents, intellect or whatever you choose to call it and teams pay mega bucks for those guys. To bring such persons into a team and then mine their strengths to prop up another sounds like socialism which is exactly the antithesis of the business of F1.
      Nico is naturally fast but not as fast as the guys I have mentioned above. But with a little help he has become a pro in qualifying. Remember he was not this fast during qualifying in the beginning of the year.
      He was effectively beaten during races after the ban was introduced. Before then, it was MercedesAmgF1 telling this person to do this and the other to do exactly the same. Who knows, we may not be talking about a Lewis Hamilton champion this year had the ban not been in place. I think with the ban removed, Nico will be very hard to beat next year if not impossible. He has already mastered qualifying. Therefore the only advantage Hamilton may have probably lies in race craft. As I said before, Nico is quite fast but with access to the other guy’s data, he can only get faster. And he will.
      You don’t race yourself and win.
8. 

   Jay Menon (@jaymenon10)
   27th November 2014, 2:30

   That 2015 Marrussia wind tunnel model will be a nice touch to Graeme Lowdown’s living room.
   1. 

      hunocsi (@hunocsi)
      27th November 2014, 13:41

      @jaymenon10 If he buys it on the auction…
      http://auctionhq.com/event/marussia/
      (the pictures also come from this site’s gallery)
9. 

   RL
   27th November 2014, 2:33

   1 – Good on Marussia to get some publicity, I don’t think Mercedes or Red Bull would be so forthcoming with their chassis design.

   2 – regarding the radio ban, it says in Keith’s translation “decided against further restrictions on radio communication.” Does this mean current restrictions will remain, and no further restrictions added, or is it a complete wind back of the restrictions?
   1. 

      LexBlair (@lexblair)
      27th November 2014, 4:33

      According to the article – Current restrictions are to be lifted and no further restrictions are to br expected. – No tabus.
      1. 

         Irejag (@irejag)
         27th November 2014, 10:33

         I personally think that there should be no communication with the driver except on the grounds of safety.
   2. 

      hunocsi (@hunocsi)
      27th November 2014, 13:42

      It’s not Marussia getting publicity, these things are going to auction:
      http://auctionhq.com/event/marussia/
      @keithcollantine
   3. 

      Andreas
      28th November 2014, 2:19

      “Does this mean current restrictions will remain, and no further restrictions added, or is it a complete wind back of the restrictions?”

      According to the AMuS article (as translated by google, I should add), the suggestion is to lift the ban completely, making it once again possible to ask for and receive driving tips etc. According to Autosport, the suggestion is to skip the planned increased restrictions, leaving the radio restrictions the way they are now (iow no driving tips). Who is right remains to be seen.

      Personally, I’d vote to keep the restrictions the way they are now – if there’s a problem with the car, the driver should be able to receive information on how to reset systems etc. But he/she shouldn’t be allowed to say “how can I go faster through corner xx?” or “where am I losing time?”.
10. 

    Brian K
    27th November 2014, 4:50

    What?!?!!? Logic, logic from F1? YESSSSSSSS, that is a dangerous combo
11. 

    Bazza Spock (@bazza-spock)
    27th November 2014, 5:32

    I don’t mind them lifting the radio ban as long as they don’t broadcast drivers saying, “how do I drive faster?” It really is emasculating.

    I don’t if it’s just because he’s french but Grosjean comes of as being the least motivated driver I’ve ever come across.
    1. 

       Strontium (@strontium)
       27th November 2014, 19:07

       @bazza-spock I personally have never thought of Grosjean as being unmotivated. I think the results (especially last year) speak for themselves.
12. 

    JCost (@jcost)
    27th November 2014, 6:19

    Martini Williams Mercedes in 2015? I’m bullish too. They have a good car and they just need a bit more down force without compromising hugely their straight line speed and they have better understanding of the PU so we should expect better chassis/PU integration.
    1. 

       Deej92 (@deej92)
       27th November 2014, 18:48

       Are Williams changing to that name?
13. 

    Oli (@dh1996)
    27th November 2014, 6:58

    So they’re trying out every ridicilous idea at least once in-season and then someone comes up with the only actual good idea (standing restarts) and it gets thrown out the year before. Now at least bring back standing restarts after a red flag!
    1. 

       BarnstableD (@barnstabled)
       27th November 2014, 16:26

       I’m glad I’m not the only person who thought standing restarts are a good idea. I see so many people dismissing the idea as rubbish without giving any reason as to why.
    2. 

       Strontium (@strontium)
       27th November 2014, 19:10

       @dh1996 I disagree with the standing safety car restarts, and am very glad they’re gone, but it would be nice to see it after a red flag.

       @barnstabled The reasons are all stated all over the place. People may not explain why but what is the point when there is nothing new to say?
    3. 

       The Abbinator (@abbinator)
       28th November 2014, 8:34

       Bin the SC — it doesn’t really make sense in a formula where you need heat in the tyres and brakes. Reintroduce the use of red flags during a race when the situation is serious enough to warrant a SC but stipulate that you cannot change tyres on the grid before the restart (unless you restart from the pitlane.)
14. 

    maarten.f1 (@)
    27th November 2014, 7:08

    While I don’t really appreciate Formula 1’s seeming randomness when it comes to rules, it’s good to see that in this case they’re not sticking with what I think is wrong. I do wonder, what does Bernie get in return for this?

    I don’t like this new FIA under Todt. I had hoped he’d prove a good replacement for Mosely, but so far he’s only made things worse. It’s ridiculous that the FIA, as a governing body, depends on Bernie and a few teams whether they can pass rules.
    1. 

       The Abbinator (@abbinator)
       28th November 2014, 8:35

       Todt is a weak kitten compared to Moseley.
15. 

    Girts (@girts)
    27th November 2014, 7:38

    I am happy to see double points and standing restarts go but these rule changes make the FIA look really silly. The organisation that claims to be governing motor sport seems to be ready to accept whatever FOM and the big teams propose when it comes to the sporting rules.

    Let’s have double points and standing restarts! – Yeah, why not.
    Double points make no sense and standing restarts are unsafe! – OK, we agree.

    Charlie Whiting defended the standing starts from the grid following safety cars and called the people, who voiced safety concerns, “silly”. Now AUTOSPORT reports that “a deeper look at its implications over recent weeks prompted widespread safety concerns.” In my opinion, it raises serious questions over Whiting’s ability to fulfill his duties.

    I still prefer Todt’s FIA to Mosley’s FIA but a toothless and apathetic governing body of F1 does not make me excited either.
    1. 

       Timothy Katz (@timothykatz)
       27th November 2014, 7:56

       I totally agree. I find it quite disturbing how alterations to rules can be presented originally as necessary for the sport and then can be abandoned just a few months later. If the alterations were that flawed, why were they adopted in the first place?
       And it’s not just the safety and race management rules either. Joe Saward’s piece on the paucity of argument – let alone solutions – about the financial crisis for smaller teams is very telling. Is the whole of F1 sleepwalking towards the cliff edge?
       1. 

          Girts (@girts)
          27th November 2014, 8:45

          @TimothyKatz The current rule-making process in F1 reminds me of a scene from Madagascar 2 where animals consider throwing someone in the volcano to make a sacrifice to water gods and get water in return. When someone asks if it really works, the answer is “No! I mean, yes. Well, uh, Maurice? Eh…50/50.” Then they happily accept the proposal and start looking for someone to sacrifice…

          The financial crisis indeed does not look better. I wonder what Todt means by “fighting” for cheaper engines. Hopefully it’s more than just expressing an opinion that the new engines are too expensive for the small teams.
16. 

    Wil-Liam (@wil-liam)
    27th November 2014, 8:41

    Radio ban dropped? Congratulations Nico Rosberg 2015 world champion :-(
    1. 

       Jack (@jmc200)
       27th November 2014, 9:29

       It’s totally incorrect to presume that Rosberg gains something more out of radio communication. All year long both drivers got the live comparison. All teams do it, it’s just that due to the title battle we’ve heard considerably more radio traffic from Mercedes than any other team.
    2. 

       Keith Campbell (@keithedin)
       27th November 2014, 13:03

       @wil-liam @jmc200
       Also Rosberg’s performance in qualifying relative to Hamilton actually improved after the radio ban. He was slower in most races both before and after the ban so i’m not convinced it made much of a difference. In either case i would think most people suspect Lewis has at the very least ‘a chance’ of beating Nico regardless of what regulation changes happen over the winter.
       1. 

          tino852 (@tino852)
          27th November 2014, 13:05

          Before ban, Rosberg won four races, after ban, only one, and that was probably due to Hamiltons spin.
          1. 

             Keith Campbell (@keithedin)
             27th November 2014, 17:39

             But those 4 wins were Australia (Ham DNF), Monaco (decided in qualy), Austria (Ham messed up qualy and started P9) and Germany (Ham started at the back). So I dont think the 4:1 ratio is statistically significant.
          2. 

             Jordi Casademunt (@casjo)
             27th November 2014, 17:44

             Before the ban, Rosberg won 2 races on his own merit (Monaco and Austria). After the ban, he won one race on his own merit. The ban came in Singapore, 14th race out of 19. So, 68% of the season was spent without the radio ban, 32% of it with the radio ban.

             Rosberg had 67% of his race wins on merit without the radio ban, and 33% of them with the radio ban.
17. 

    Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
    27th November 2014, 8:47

    At least someone’s using number 1 on their 2015 car.
    They couldn’t resist putting a tiny appendage on the end of the nose – I guess we can expect most of next year’s cars won’t change much apart from the front. Even if the Ferrari, McLaren, Lotus and Sauber designs belong in the skip.
    1. 

       Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
       27th November 2014, 14:01

       Surely even this tiny appendage breaks the 2015 regs?
    2. 

       Wil-Liam (@wil-liam)
       27th November 2014, 14:10

       Who is using number one?
18. 

    Jack (@jmc200)
    27th November 2014, 8:55

    Tragic seeing that (very good looking) Marussia…
19. 

    HUHHII (@huhhii)
    27th November 2014, 9:45

    Shame about standing restarts. It sounded good rule change for me. Would’ve liked to see it in use at least once before giving it a final judgement.
    1. 

       ColdFly F1 (@)
       27th November 2014, 15:21

       @huhhii, why do you want to see a standing restart once? It would look the same as any normal start.
       1. 

          HUHHII (@huhhii)
          27th November 2014, 17:06

          @coldfly – Obviously the standing restart in the middle of the GP isn’t the same as normal standing start for the race due to tyre temperatures etc.
          1. 

             ColdFly F1 (@)
             27th November 2014, 18:21

             @huhhii, I doubt it.
             Charlie said that the last lap under SC “will just be literally like a formation lap.” Thus why would tyre temperatures be different?

             But fortunately that is all irrelevant now.
          2. 

             P. Shapiro (@advancedideamechanics)
             28th November 2014, 8:13

             I think there are two factors other than tire temperature that would make standing restarts less than ideal. First, given that engine temperature can already be an issue for pole and front rows as they wait for the rest of the field to get into position at the start of the race, it seems like that would be even more of a problem later on. Second, I think there would be a greater likelihood of mechanical failure on a restart given the additional wear on all components during racing conditions.

             It is also worth noting that a stalled vehicle in the middle of a standing start creates a huge, entirely unavoidable mess for the entire field behind it. At the start of a race, where each car is (in theory) in the best possible condition this is definitely an acceptable risk, but after racing has begun it might not be.
20. 

    Alec Glen (@alec-glen)
    27th November 2014, 13:04

    Hmm, taking the double points, radio ban and stupid restarts out of consideration, what’s going to keep F1 in the news this offseason? Bernie must either have some ridiculous masterplan of controversy to introduce before Christmas or CVC might actually want to rein it in a bit as some of the attacks about F1’s value and where it’s going has hit home…
21. 

    Robbie (@robbie)
    27th November 2014, 14:06

    Double points gone…fantastic.

    Standing restarts? I still don’t have a problem with that concept and would have liked to see it. I haven’t read the exact analysis of why it would be dangerous in reality but I certainly have heard a lot of rhetoric that was inaccurate in spite of what Whiting had said…a) only after safety cars but even only after red flags would have been fine b) never too near the original race start nor the race end c) never in the wet ie. always at Whiting’s discretion ie. only when it was safe d) never too close consecutively e)most drivers/teams use safety car periods to pit for tires so the argument that there would be guys on new tires against guys on old ones is an assumption, and the very presence of the concept of standing restarts means the teams would adjust for it. Bottom line for me…the 6 or 8 times a season we might have seen a standing restart could have really added additional excitement and suspense and been done so as safely as the origin starts of the races.

    As to the radio ban? Particularly regarding NR vs. LH I have found it laughable all season at the rhetoric that only, or mostly, NR gained from it at Mercedes. I also think the kind of ‘help’ as it is being termed, like it means a driver NEEDS it, as opposed to simply accessing anything that is within his toolkit to make him faster, which is his job, is a product of the complexity of today’s cars and tires and the amount of effect the PUs have on the braking as well as the need for so much conservation in this endurance F1 as opposed to sprint F1. But mainly what I think is silly about this topic is that the communications we get to hear during the races are hand picked for the show, so it’s all rather artificial. They can, as they choose, make any driver sound as though he is always asking for help simply by airing more of those kinds of comms from one specific driver. Or more on average throughout the season.
22. 

    A.D. (@aks-das)
    27th November 2014, 14:06

    Just found a link before change to Pirelli.
    http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/11/analysis-of-first-day-on-pirelli-f1-tyres-a-positive-start/#comment-153324

    where many people hated Bridgestone tyres and wanted more pit stops
23. 

    sbewers (@sbewers)
    27th November 2014, 17:28

    Whilst I’m glad that standing restarts and double points have both been dropped, it does make me nervous about what other new gimmicks they will think of between now and March.
24. 

    SauberS1 (@saubers1)
    27th November 2014, 23:05

    I’m glad to dropping of double points.

Comments are closed.