Analysis: F1 overtaking crisis – Why listening to F1 drivers is bad for the racing
Sebastian Vettel
Posted By: James Allen  |  28 Mar 2017   |  1:43 pm GMT  |  395 comments

Although the Melbourne weekend was largely positive for Formula 1, it revealed one serious threat that hangs over the series this year, which is the problem with overtaking. Melbourne is not a typical race track and we need to see the cars on circuits like Shanghai and Bahrain, but already some things are painfully clear.

There were just 5 overtakes in the whole race, compared with 37 last year and while the new aerodynamics have a large part to play in this, there isn’t much that can be done to improve the difficulty of following another car now the season has begun.

However there are strong calls behind the scenes in F1 for Pirelli to review its selection of tyres to bring the softer compounds and increase the variables in the racing.

For Spain, for example, it has nominated Soft, Medium and Hard. No team will use the hard and so the race will be processional with largely similar strategies. If it was the softer compounds, there could be more variability. Valtteri Bottas did a stint of over 20 laps in testing in Barcelona on Ultra Soft tyres, which is an ideal opening stint length for a race, so they can’t be that ‘ultra’ soft after all!

All the signs are that in listening to the F1 drivers, who wanted tyres they could ‘push’ on, the sport has suffered; it has had a detrimental effect on the overtaking as the cars are all doing basically the same thing, rather than mixing it up and having big performance differences at various stages of the race.

Max Verstappen

So the drivers are happy, they are having fun. But the racing has suffered and actually the drivers from 6th place downwards have all suffered because they have no chance of getting a big result now. The low degradation tyres are another thing that keeps the top teams ahead.

Because the Pirelli tyres barely degrade over a long stint and the compounds are closer together there is no differential in pace. We saw degradation of half a second over a long stint on some compounds where last year the same run and compound would have seen the performance drop by five seconds a lap. Those offsets are where overtaking happens, when cars are jumbled up on different strategies.

At the same time the changeover in regulations from 2016 to 2017 has seen the wealthy top three teams open a huge performance gap to the rest, thanks to much greater levels of downforce.

The finishing gap on Sunday between the fifth placed Red Bull of Max Verstappen and sixth place Felipe Massa in the Williams was 55 seconds, which is basically 1 second per lap.

The Haas car qualified in 6th place at Melbourne and was 2.6% off the Mercedes in performance terms. In 2016 a 2.6% delta would put you 14th on the grid. So you can see that the field has opened up, which is bad for the racing, it’s more like it was in the 1990s. What kills F1 is the separation of the field and it’s this area that should be Ross Brawn’s number one priority to fix with the FIA in the long term plan for the next set of regulation changes.


It means that the leading cars have a pit stop in hand over the rest by around Lap 12 so there is nothing the midfield cars can do to get involved in the action, no scope for a Sergio Perez, for example, to get a podium by clever strategy or taking a chance on a Safety Car.

F1 is now an A race and a B race. This will carry on through the year.

More worryingly, the sport is dependent on the Ferraris and Mercedes staying on the same pace through the development race this season – and hopefully Red Bull joining in once they stabilise a couple of problems on aerodynamics and engine, which they will do by Russia or Spain at the latest.

The 2017 season is set to be the biggest development arms race the sport has seen, due to wide open scope on the aerodynamics and a token free system on engines. And if one of the top teams gets a step over the rest, for example if the stage two Mercedes engine from Spain onwards gives them a half a second of performance margin over Ferrari, then the viewers will soon switch off.

Brawn and the FIA will have to step in if that happens and effect a short term solution to the problem for the good of the sport.

Sebastian Vettel

So what is the problem with the overtaking?
There was concern at the end of last season about the new regulations and the idea that the turbulent air from these higher downforce cars would make it hard for a car to follow another and pass. At the same time the extra downforce means braking distances are shorter. The idea with these rules was to make the cars much faster over a lap as the drivers complained that they were not a challenge to drive and 17 year old Max Verstappen was able to compete straight away, which older drivers found depressing.

The other idea was to give the drivers tyres on which they could push hard throughout, as in the Bridgestone and Michelin days. But the overtaking then, such as it was, came from the refuelling levels and also the offset in performance between two tyre companies.

With robust tyres that have low degradation and low wear the cars basically will qualify and race in car pace order.

McLaren F1
Was this Melbourne specific or will we also see it in China?
Melbourne is a particularly difficult track for overtaking, as there are no long straights, braking distances are shorter this year and the track is lined with walls.

Fernando Alonso had a top speed of just 290km/h in the horsepower-challenged McLaren Honda and managed to keep Esteban Ocon behind him for most of the race, despite the Force India having top speed of 317km/h. That will not happen in Shanghai.

The Chinese track is better, thanks to the 1.170km main straight and the Drag Reduction System on the rear wing, which sheds drag when a car is within a second of the car in front. This year, with cars that have more downforce and therefore more drag, the DRS will be more powerful in China. We expect to see a speed boost of over 20km/h and cars will pass on the straights. There were 28 overtakes last year of which 16 were on the DRS straight. We’d expect to see that and more this year.

Valtteri Bottas

Driver Reaction
Following last weekend’s Australian Grand Prix, several Formula 1 drivers offered their thoughts on the lack of overtaking moves witnessed in the Melbourne race.

Perez expressed his belief that a driver now needs to be two seconds quicker than the car in front to pull off a move. Hulkenberg described overtaking in 2017 as “almost impossible”.

Mercedes’ Valtteri Bottas highlighted the problem with the turbulent air as a particular concern for the chance of a pass.

He said: “Even in the years before it’s been difficult to follow once you get within one and a half, or one second, just because of the turbulent air which messes up the aerodynamics of the car and that way we don’t have that much grip.

“Now, as more of the grip from the car is relying on the aero, it’s a bigger effect. And the cars are wider so I think there’s more turbulent air so now it’s more like two seconds or even two and a half because you actually feel quite a big effect from the car in front and that way in the corners it’s more difficult to follow.”

Lewis Hamilton

Hamilton, who had expressed his concerns about overtaking before the start of season, outlined his belief that strategy battles and pitstops would produce the main passes in 2017.

He said: “It’s always generally been tough to follow. I hope that doesn’t mean for the rest of the year that it’s more of a train.

“I don’t know if it was exciting for you guys to watch, but for me personally I want to be closer up with the cars and doing more close wheel-to-wheel battling. It’s really through strategy and pitstops that we are racing right now.”

But Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen, who finished fourth at Albert Park last weekend, urged caution on the overtaking issue.

He said: “It’s only one race and this circuit is far from let’s say a normal circuit. Some circuits will be more easy, some more harder in a year. We have to see how it goes in the next races.”

What did you make of the issue of overtaking at the Australian Grand Prix? Leave your thoughts in the comment section below or head over to the JA on F1 Facebook page for more discussion.

Featured Innovation
technical innovation from tata COMMUNICATIONS
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!

Every driver wants to drive a slot car with infinite grip, but fans want something less planted. The answer is a brutal reduction in downforce coupled with larger tires. A simple, constant chord, two element wing, front and rear, just large enough to balance the car would save tons of development costs too. Cars would actually have to slow down for corners………. remember that from back in the 60’s? Cars would slide around, drivers would howl, and fans would cheer. Plus accidents would be less dangerous because of the reduced cornering speeds. Drivers usually don’t get hurt on the straights at 300kph, they get hurt flying off the track in the corners going 290kph.


To everyone that is deriding the return of ground effect for safety reasons, please remember that the first full ground effect car (Lotus 79) entered competition in 1978 at Zolder. Ground effect was then banned in 1980 (for the beginning of the 1981 season). During the time period that ground effect was used by all teams and effective, there were 0, I repeat ZERO, deaths in Formula 1. True fans of F1 dont want any F1 driver to die while driving, whether it be during testing, practice, or racing. That includes Marcus Ericsson to Lewis Hamilton. These men are super humans in a world full of regulars. Informative viewing for TRUE F1 fans is readily available on YouTube. Check out “Gentlemen, lift your skirts (1981)” followed by “The Grid (1983)” and finally “Turbo Engines – How it all started (1986)”. Our current savior, Ross Brawn, is in these documentaries as a young lad, up and coming in the world of F1. As is Murray Walker, the man who, outside of the team personnel, probably understands the sport better than anyone (maybe better than some personnel). Both of them derided the arrival of wings as the main means of downforce generation. Brawn especially understood the negative impact wings would have on the spectacle. If as much time had been spent on ground effect as has been spent on generating downforce through wings, we would arguably be enjoying the same lap times, if not better, today, with a much better spectacle (imagine Villeneuve vs Arnoux at Dijon 1979.) Please remain faithful in Brawn being able to get F1 back in to shape, as I feel he is of the same mindset as the TRUE fans of F1.


I am by no means a expert, but it would seem I may know more about this then the “brain think tank” F1 seems to have. REDUCE AERO RELIANCE, INCREASE MECHANICAL GRIP. Why is that so hard to understand?

need proof, just look at karting, simple enough.


Why oh why do F1 Drivers and the media personnel who are meant to be promoting it always criticising it? It’s been like this for 9+ years now…

I read a news article where Verstappen said the race was going to be boring. My interest fell. I then watched the qualifying and race highlights and thought, “wow, that’s much better!”

The issue is not about overtaking but about cars being able to follow each other closely without needed a significantly hire delta or the tyres overheating too much.

I’d rather have 6x good overtakes from closely matched cars than 20x DRS straightline procession passes.


Ok, where to start…

“All the signs are that in listening to the F1 drivers, who wanted tyres they could ‘push’ on, the sport has suffered; it has had a detrimental effect on the overtaking as the cars are all doing basically the same thing, rather than mixing it up and having big performance differences at various stages of the race.”

No, the sport did not listen to drivers, it listened to some fans and lost F1 stakeholders. Hamilton is quoted later in the same article, “…but for me personally I want to be closer up with the cars and doing more close wheel-to-wheel battling.”
Drivers want to race wheel to wheel, they didn’t ask for the cars to be faster, they asked for the ability to race closer. Someone thought they would be disadvantaged if aero was reduced (the real way to allow for closer racing), so they boycotted that crucial change. It was clear that the path was reduced aero and I can’t believe the stakeholders are that stupid.

Performance differences, be it through different compounds, levels of degradation or weight differences (due to different fuel loads) are not what create real racing. The best racing is created when two drivers of similar talent are racing under as similar conditions as possible. A lighter car or a car with better tyres passing another is no true racing, it’s just cars under different circumstances sharing a piece of track, as if they were two different categories. So no, softer, higher degrading tyres were not the solution, artificially shuffling the field with mandatory use of compounds or refueling were not either. Giving the drivers the tools to be able to race, less aero to allow closer following, more engines and gear boxes and good tyres to be able to push, better rules (no parc ferme, no excessive penalties, real track limits, etc.) and rule stability to allow the field to compress, are the main factors that will help improve the show.


Everyone predicted the difficulty in overtaking with the new aero except for the people who should know. However, I suspect Bernie, to a great extent, influenced the design of the cars because he somehow believed that more aggressive looking cars would keep people watching.

The fact is, F1 has never been a sport of overtaking. In the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s it was as much about reliability as anything else. Mechanicals pushed to their maximum frequently failed. Today’s mechanicals are largely faultless because they’re barely stretched.

The fans have also been served up cars with engines to the same specification in terms of layout and type, there is no advantage gained by, say, a V12 Ferrari at Monza over a DFV, and the DFV’s advantage on tight tracks because of it’s lower weight.

Why is beyond the wit of man to eliminate hugely expensive aero altogether. Make the cars aero neutral and decrease the size of the engines but allow unlimited layout. Cost savings are likely to be large, attracting other engine suppliers and teams into the sport.

Pirelli are the perennial whipping boys, but the tyres are only as critical as they are because of the enormous ‘downforce’ they are subjected to. Get rid of the downforce and the tyres become less critical in the equation.

Laughably, F1 is in no better a position than it was with multiple tyre suppliers when, I think it was Michelin, were flying tyres out to their teams between qualification and the race start. And as bad as that was, a single supplier no longer allows the opportunity for suppliers and teams to address car inequality with clever tyre technology.

What we are left with is largely what Max Mosley wanted, identical cars, in every respect, in the belief that the drivers would make the difference. Add that to Bernie’s faith in the Bling Factor, rolling out high profile celebrities to influence the gullible to watch the sport, and we are now reaping the dubious benefits of confused thinking and manipulation of the sports identity.

F1 was always about pushing the boundaries of technology, small teams like Lotus, Tyrrell and Williams competing with clever ideas. Now it’s a Scalextric race with only the high rollers able to compete.


“it has had a detrimental effect on the overtaking as the cars are all doing basically the same thing, rather than mixing it up and having big performance differences at various stages of the race.”

I disagree with this statement. The trouble with these differing strategies is that it makes it hard to follow the race, with everything only clear in the closing laps. Also, I don’t really want to see overtakes where there are “big performance differences” as this is basically artificial racing. If that means less overtaking during the race then so be it. I agree that there needs to be a degree of balance for the show, but overtaking is not meant to be easy!


What is exciting about a DRS overtake exactly?

For those concerned about the ‘show’ this year, I would encourage you to get away from this idea that overtaking always equals excitement. I believe uncertainty, the the resolution of that uncertainty brings excitement. I also think a more dangerous sport (within reason) would be more exciting, but will leave that for now.

How might one introduce uncertainty to F1 by genuine means? I think it has been proven that tyres are not the answer, and any attempt to use these as a mechanism for uncertainty will be scuppered by the engineers and cause unintended consequences. Here are my ideas in order of urgency:

1) (Even) faster cars. The lack of mistakes on Sunday prove to me that the cars are still not demanding enough for the drivers.

2) More challenging racetracks – mistakes should change the order significantly. You are no longer ‘on a knife edge’ if you have metres of tarmac beyond the track limits.

3) Help close combat by changing the way the cars produce downforce. To my knowledge this can be done without a reduction in downforce, just have it generated by the floor like LMP cars.

4) Once these are done, keep the regulations mostly stable for a 5-10 year period. The law of diminishing returns will ensure that the midfield teams can challenge the top teams despite having a smaller budget.

Just my two pence; changing the tyres – or any quick fix – are not the answer.


It is what it is, I’m happy to see the best engineers developing the best possible cars due to the existing rules, why are the rest whining for handicap? not even “the rest” but even Hamilton is wining (which is not a big surprise either), this is the pinnacle of the sport for everyone, so if the best pack is for Mercedes or Ferrari or whoever because they have prepare and have the best pack, well, let them win the championship because they deserve it, if the rest of the world gets bored because of that, there are a lot of other racing sports you can watch. I love rally btw.


That artical painted a pretty bad picture of the passing situation, but you have to remember they’re all new cars and this was their first race, and the track didn’t lend itself to passsing and the drivers were a bit rusty! I’m amazed there weren’t many safty cars due to bits of front wings lying on the track in the first few laps. That would’ve changed things. In the next few races the cars will be more fine tuned and things will come together and teams will adjust tactics and racing will improve.
I admit to being sceptical about the effect the new rules would have, but it’s wrong to jump to conclusions without giving everything a chance!. To me it seems the writer was being excessively negitive!

Racing driver 1

Well I have to say that when they took the refuelling away, I was disappointed. Taking the refuelling out of F1, just like taking the venom out of a bite. That decision was the vasectomy of F1. Refuelling added so much interest, scope and drama to strategy and made the racing better. I think F1 would be better off with it back. I just can’t see the downside.
I didn’t really mind the tyre wars either, but that’s another chapter.


It’s looking like a very uninteresting season, apart from the resurgence of Ferrari. Someone needs to do something with tyres, as being able to do 25 laps on so-called ultra softs, without loosing any pace, will kill the racing. Hopefully Ross can come up with something. I’m glad to hear the drivers are enjoying themselves though, but from Massa down they won’t be for long.


The reason the racing is not as close as it has been the last few years was because the cars and rules were artificial. tyres which restricted the cars true potential, DRS which allowed drivers to get ahead when they lacked the skill to do it properly etc etc.

Tbh, I think what people need to appreciate more is that Formula 1 is just as much about the Engineering challenge in the R&D of the car as it is about the driver. The cars we’ve got now are the fastest and most technologically advanced, minus driver aids, we’ve ever seen and will be looked backed on with tinted glasses the same way we look back at the mid-00’s now. It is also a massive step into returning F1 to the pinnacle of Motorsports than the terrible mess of a formula we had for the last 5/6 years with rubbish tyres, flappy wings and the 50 overtakes a race which you could no longer tell were genuinely brilliant or just the result of some button pushing (all to appease some fans who wanted “entertainment”). No wonder MSC didn’t bother renewing his Merc contract at the end of 2012.

All what we have to do now is remove DRS, bring back mid race refuelling and tyre wars and we will have a formula which is truly the best of the best.

If you want to watch some artificial racing all in the name of entertainment, the BTCC starts this weekend…….


Kimi may be Kimi with all of his character quirks, but he is also a strong voice of reason and clarity on almost every topic. And he is absolutely right.

If we were expecting decent overtaking at Albert Park of all places, then we were naive. The structure of the circuit simply doesn’t allow for it. It’s not as bad as Monaco, but this race is usually only interesting when there are safety car situations to jumble things up. Otherwise, it is almost always a procession.

I think the best way to address a lack of overtaking is to increase the power/grip ratio. This happened with the introduction of the new V6 hybrid turbo and quite reduced downforce. I don’t think we want to go back to reduced downforce; we want the cars to be as fast and dangerous as possible. Rather, I think the answer is to increase power. Let the engines go to 1500 or even 2000 bhp, if possible. This will make the cars much harder to drive in all the places where cars need to be harder to drive and where driver mistakes lead to overtaking: all points of throttle and braking input. Drivers will have to be extremely precise in their braking; a small mistake in technique, settting, or a combination of the two could send the car spinning or sailing past an apex into a corner. The same goes for throttle application on exit; if you are too abrupt and non-linear, you will spin the rear tires and perhaps slide on corner exit. All of these were factors in the exciting battles between Lewis and Nico over race distances in 2014 that lead to Lewis being able to overtake Nico over race runs and seize the win from him. Braking distances will also necessarily increase, which will allow more time for a braking mistake to cost a driver time in a corner. Tire wear will also increase, which allow for overtaking opportunities. And drivers won’t be able to avoid the tire wear issue by just going slower, as the downshifts with higher revs will take some toll on the rear tires (another area where drivers will have to be precise).

I would also suggest that opening up the rules to make the cars more front downforce weighted (with perhaps some penalty to the rear) would be a positive step for increasing overtaking, as it would mitigate the understeer induced by the wake of following a car so that not so much of a penalty is paid in the apex of corners. The harder the cars are to control at the rear, the more mistakes there will be and the more overtaking we will see if the grip is more balanced to the front.


Message to Ross….

Watch footage of a Lotus 72, Tyrell 003 or similar through a fast bend. use this as your template and you won’t go far wrong!


I would much rather less overtaking then DRS enabled overtakes.
Like everyone has been saying for at least the last 20 years, something needs to be done about the airflow leaving the cars. I’m no aerodynamicist, but I imagine regulations would need to be changed in order to encourage designs that would allow cars to more easily follow. Obviously no team is going to voluntarily make it easier for cars to follow.
Australia 2017 reminded me of the processions of the first decade of the 2000’s. I think, as others have hoped, overtaking will improve as the season moves on.
Loving the faster cars, loving the Vettel/Hamilton dual and loving the future outlook with the new management of the sport. It definitely feels like some long needed, real progress will be made in the medium to long term and it will hopefully produce some epic racing in the process.

Bendor Grosvenor

With respect, I don’t follow your logic here. Surely the answer is to not to stop drivers from always pushing, but to deal with what prevents close following; the problem of turbulent air.

Durable tyres and fast cars are fine. But we must stop the aero from being so complex, and such a big factor, that closing to within two seconds is impossible.

Less aero will also mean fewer costs.


Come on, blaming the tires? Really? The upgrade to low deg, longer lasting and more consistent tires is not the problem. The problem as everyone with an inkling of common sense knows, that is procession we will be watching all season, is all due to aero. The new aero regs have basically destroyed the sport and will do a lot more damage if swift measures are not taken soon.

Fans, myself included, want to watch close racing between the drivers pushing hard lap after lap without artificial high deg tires slowing them down. Strategy with tires shouldn’t play as great a part as drivers being able to push flatout for 2+ hours. The faster driver and cars combo should be able to follow closely and make passes on their rivals. But in order for that to happen, they have to get close to their rivals on corner exit. This isn’t likely to happen this season.

Remember without the fans, F1 is just a vacuum. And if something isn’t done quickly viewership will quickly decline. Especially in this age where we have multiple sources of entertainment vying for the eyes and ears of people.


Well what else do you expect from the sport when FIA president himself tells viewers to be happy with better looking cars rather than overtaking?


I’d rather see 5 difficult overtake Tha 37 pressing the overtake button


One-make racing would solve this problem too … let’s not forget that Formula 1 has three championships: Driver + Constructor + Engine. If a team has the best of all 3 they should win every race as a forgone conclusion.

Seems like a lot of people today want to “close racing” so much that they are willing to sacrifice one one or more of those championships )-8


The overtaking situation does appear to be grim
Even the official Formula 1 highlights package of Melbourne skips about half of the entire race with no content between laps 24 and 52.


It does amaze me that year after year the vast majority of ‘us armchair pundits’ who should be in the worst position to make best descisions for the technical direcection for F1 seem to be far better at picking the ‘right path’ than those who are supposedly in the know. I know variations on the following have been said time and again by fans of F1 but maybe if enough of us shout the same thing loudly enough somebody might just listen:
1) It’s NOT Pirelli’s fault! Just as DRS exists to fix a broken formula so is the tyre manufacturers being asked to fix issues they shouldn’t need to be involved in.
2) GET RID OF ALL THE FANCY AERO!!! Is that really such a hard message to understand? Not only would racing be closer and more fun but car development would be far less expensive and so good for the whole grid. I would sugggest the only ‘wings’ an F1 car should have are front & rear, and then ONLY single plane designs.
3) The money teams get for competing should be equally spread. If a team wants to spend more then do a good enough job to earn more, or hand in pocket. Money earned from F1 should be enough to run a decent team if evenly spread, and the whole thing wasn’t so expensive.
5) There is nothing wrong with the currrent format of the racing, stop fiddling with the only bit that isn’t broken.
And finally on a personal note, feel free to disagree…
6) Scrap the engine formula entirely. F1 should be a standard fuel formula where everyone is expected to run the same formulation, and (horror) a maximum fuel load per race… Beyond that engine manufacturers can bung in whatever they like to fit that spec. The current horrible engines won’t become automatically dead (bad for current investmant) but there will be scope for new ideas and entrants aimed at a stable and level playingfield.
Rant over, thank you.


Rant was totally correct. Agree with you. It’s simple solutions really but why on earth can they not implement them?


My gosh, a voice of sanity in wilderness of confused souls. Thank you!
I have been ranting myself, for years, that the primary problem is the aero….that we have created “air-craft” racing on the ground…..please…..just give me some beautifully sculpted, incredibly powerful…..automobiles. Ones capable of showing off the talents of the best drivers in the world. And put them on tracks that allow that for that demonstration. That done and F1 will have no problems.


It’s not the drivers who should be ignored, it’s the fans and most especially the press. Twenty years ago both were moaning and whinging about how processional F1 was and how it was impossible to overtake.

Since aero is the cause, the first idea was aero: DRS. And guess what? It worked, at least a little. There was more overtaking.

The reaction? Moaning and whinging in the media and the “die hard” fans about how artificial it made the racing. Plus there weren’t THAT many more overtakes.

So F-1 got in a huddle with Pirelli and came up with a BRILLIANT idea: tires with extreme variations in performance over a very short life span. The result? Overtaking everywhere! New strategy options that leave everyone guessing! Midfield guys who get lucky and end up on the podium! Excitement abounds and three years in a row we had three or four teams fighting for the championship right up to the end of the season.

The media and the die-hards? They moaned even louder. The drivers weren’t pushing. The passing was completely artificial. The cars weren’t fast. They didn’t make enough noise. The teams were pulling their hair out dealing with nothing but tires. Marsha Marsha Marsha!

So F-1 listened and gave the media and the die-hards what they wanted: durable tires and BIG aero so we had fast cars and drivers who could push like crazy.

And now? MORE WHINGING! There’s no overtaking! You can’t follow closely! The pit strategies are all the same! THIS IS WHAT EVERYONE TOLD YOU WOULD HAPPEN YOU DOLTS!

Personally I think they should ban wings altogether and gin up a rules package that allows heavy customization of the undertray of the car. What aero the teams can get comes from directly beneath the vehicle, not from the ends.

But having only watched F-1 since 1983, I’m a relative newcomer to the sport. I don’t know anything.


You may not know anything, but you certainly have it right.
But, I would go you one better. Enforce almost no downforce, with speed coming from the power to weight ratio; allow a greater range of design parameters thus creating a grid of cars that didn’t derive from the same design concepts; and, by the way, show a bit more creativity when it comes to the structure of a three day race weekend.
Give us cars not aircraft.


Igave you a plus one. Would have given you a plus one million if I could.
totally agree with every word you wrote


The gospel according to Kimi.

Andrew Halliday

Reading through the comments here, I notice a number of suggestions for mandatory tyre changes, pit stops etc. I’m against any rules that force teams to run their race in a set way. When I first started following F1 in the 90’s, one of the attractions was the freedom teams had to do what they wanted. I’d previously watched V8 Supercars and always felt that rules such as control tyres, mandatory tyre stop/fuel stop and top 10 shootout for qualifying diluted the essence of the racing. F1 should be all about building a car and using your choice of tyres, fuel, number of pit stops (whether to stop at all?) etc. I don’t even like the current rules which mandate the use of 2 prescribed tyre compounds.

PS. I like the wider, flatter look of this year’s cars but the size of the front wings need to be reduced to stop them looking like bulldozers. I want to be able to see the front tyres without the front wing getting in the way.

Top Tags
SEARCH Innovation