Printable View
I know why I hate DRS. In a battle for position during a GP one driver being able to open a flap doesn't show skill, ability or racecraft. It just shows he can press a button.Quote:
Originally Posted by F1boat
That's not better racing IMHO, it's just more overtakes.
My sentiments exactly. It's a load of c*ck.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Absolutely. Even a reverse grid race — something I don't think is suitable for F1 either — offers more opportunity for driver skill to shine than does DRS.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Stuff like reverse grids, success ballast, etc might be all very well for touring car championships, but not F1. As it happens, I believe touring car racing would be exciting enough without such gimmicks, as proved by the start-of-season races when all the cars are at base weight, but that's another discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by F1boat
If I can offer a suggestion to anyone else who feels frustrated by DRS: try to forget about the effect it has on overtaking. Yes really :) Instead focus on the positive effect: the guy who is fastest will probably win the race.
Before, being fastest was no good if you got stuck in the Trulli Train, or your pit strategy gave you bad track position. DRS might not be the right solution, but is it worse than the problem it replaced?
This point of view would be all very well were there no other solutions to those problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
I don't think the possibility of much better alternatives invalidates the point I was making.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Suppose I hate pears, can tolerate apples, and love bananas. If I have an apple, I can still wish I had a banana, but it might do me good to remember that at least it's not a pear.
But perhaps it is good if the fastest doesn't necessarily win? If the pacesetter hits trouble and drops behind other cars, it would provide some excitement that he is finding it very difficult to work his way back to the front again instead of easing past everyone and regaining his "rightful" position.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
Also the problem is that DRS reduces the possibilities of surprise results. Kubica's 2010 Australian and Schumacher's 2011 Canadian GP's were quite similar, but the result was different due to DRS. With DRS Kubica would have never finished on podium as he had several cars behind him and all would have passed. Kubica's defending even forced Hamilton to an alternative strategy, which cost him the race, but also gave more variety and excitement in the process.
True, the Trulli-train was frustrating to watch, but when an overtake did occur at least there was the satisfaction of knowing that it was accomplished “un-aided”, with driver skill alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
I can’t help but feel that the solution to overtaking has not been fully thought through by the sport, with gimmicks like DRS hastily introduced as a “band-aid” solution to keep the fans watching :mark: .
Those are very valid arguments, for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
Yes I agree, it has.Quote:
Originally Posted by schmenke
I wouldn't under-estimate the difficulty of coming up with a workable "proper" solution though. The problem stemmed from reliance on aerodynamics, so any true solution has to result in a huge reduction in aerodynamic downforce. The FIA's past tactics of fiddling with details like wing dimensions have never worked, the engineers are just too good at making improvements in other areas to offset the losses. It would have to be something radical, like removing wings entirely or introducing spec aero parts. There would be plenty of opposition to those too.
Roll on FP1, only 7 hours until we have some on-track action to talk about :)