-
Maybe it's because I'm more of an F1 fan than an IRL fan, but to me the DRS is a much better solution to the passing issue than Push-to-Pass (which is really just Push-Not-to-Pass... like KERS). With KERS and P2P, if both drivers get on it at roughly the same time, there is no advantage. With DRS, the following car has to be within one second of the leading car. And since at least two laps have to expire before it's activated, it's not as if a slow (but lucky) car is going to be eating up the field just by using DRS. If the passing car just got a lucky break, instead of disappearing into the distance (as is usually the case), he will simply be re-passed when they get back into a DRS zone. I didn't care for P2P when CCWS had it and I don't care for it now.
I like the technology potential that KERS might lead to in passenger cars (P2P doesn't have a real world application that I'm aware of). But for racing, I really like DRS.
Additionally, I'm not a fan (at all) of the IRL forcing people to choose these make believe lanes. Don't weave. But pick whatever racing line you want and RACE! On a given weekend, if they're all on, I'll always watch the F1 race, usually the GP2 and I'll at least DVR the IRL race. And if I sum them all up, on the officiating (this season), I'd rank F1 first (usually), GP2 second (usually) and the IRL has consistently been the caboose this season. Truly AWFUL officiating, IMO. I don't think the IRL could do any worse if they just fired Barnhart and rewrote the rule book (the road course portion anyway) to what GP2 has, and let former GP2 stewards call the races. More and more of the drivers in the IRL are ex GP2 drivers anyway. Heck, at least they'd be familiar with it. And it makes more sense than a lot of these odd ball rules that Barnhart and his cast of clowns have dreamed up.
-
I agree with Jag. The 1 second rule is what makes it palatable for me. If a driver is 5 seconds behind, he can't use it to catch up. But if he's faster and closes to within a second, then he's faster anyway and it sure beats having a clearly faster car become stuck aerodynamically behind a slower car. Last year's championship was largely decided by this when Alonso got stuck behind the Renault and couldn't find a way past in the last race of the year. Maybe it will need to be tweaked at a couple of races, Turkey comes to mind, as it may be too big of an advantage, but overall, I think it has been a great success. The racing in F1 has been very good the last few years and the DRS has helped F1 have great racing this year. I would add that I think DRS is only a part of the reason for the great racing this year. The Pirelli tires have been maybe an even bigger reason that F1 has been so good this year and this could be something that IndyCar could look at. If IndyCar had tires that would have trouble lasting for a full fuel run and teams would have to pit more because of tires than fuel, then maybe that would help eliminate the all the fuel saving that goes on in their races.
I would add that I'm no fan of PTP either.
-
I pretty much agree with you guys on all points with the exception of the DRS. It's a decadent delight for sure. I agree that it has certainly helped spice up the racing as well as some other things but there's just something so wrong about one driver having being able to use a device that another can't. This ain't Mario Kart. All Rosberg had was one big smoking car on the grid and no DRS when he shot to the front. It would have been interesting to see him attempt to hold off the rest without being passed like he was standing still when the DRS was activated. Fat chance at seeing another "Villeneuve at Jarama" in modern day F1.
I'm don't think of myself as a purist. The Hanford Device was fits and giggles but the only advantage a driver had was his position on the track.
