FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[nikon133]

Haven't seen anyone mentioning that before... don't you guys (and girls) agree that it really is unfair when driver gets punished for going to pits during the safety car deployment - just because someone else messed up? I mean, what about drivers who were planned for pitstop at that time? What are their options - get punished or park their car once gas is out and walk home?

They should come with system that would enable planned pitstops yet prevent others from surging to pits all at he same time as safety car deploys. For example, all teams could provide race director with sealed envelopes containing planned pitstops within first 5 or 10 laps of the race. If driver goes to pits during the initial phase of safety car deployment (locked pits phase), race director can break the seal on that driver's envelope and confirm he was planned for that pit. If that does not happen, envelopes remain sealed. And if team fails to provide director with pitstop schedule, fine - they'll have to obey locked pit rule or get penalised.

OK so this is just an improvisation, but I'm sure simple yet safe enough system could be invented in order not to jeopardise valid strategies, prevent other people from taking advantage and yet keep strategies secret from others' prying eyes.

What do you think?

[EwanM]

I'm quite in favour of the current system. I know it can be unfair and ruin alot of people's races. (like Rosberg/Massa/Kubica today) but end of the day if they didn't have the rule, our races wouldn't be as interesting.

I understand why people dislike it. But I for one think it is a decent rule - plus it still uses 10 second pens which I think are more justified than Drive Thru rubbish

[stonemonkey]

I think Brundle mentioned this during the race and when the teams had been discussing it with the FIA they were told they should put in more fuel than they need for their planned strategy. Obviously with the penalty of carrying extra fuel they won't do that so the only solution I can see would be to force them to have a small reserve tank that they're only allowed to dip into when the pit lane is closed. Other than that it's up to the teams to take such things into account when they plan their strategies and the luck of the draw.

[EwanM]

I think Brundle mentioned this during the race and when the teams had been discussing it with the FIA they were told they should put in more fuel than they need for their planned strategy. Obviously with the penalty of carrying extra fuel they won't do that so the only solution I can see would be to force them to have a small reserve tank that they're only allowed to dip into when the pit lane is closed. Other than that it's up to the teams to take such things into account when they plan their strategies and the luck of the draw.

Somebody's been watchin the ITV highlights

[stonemonkey]

? nope, Brundle mentioned that during the race.

[EwanM]

? nope, Brundle mentioned that during the race.

Yeah he did, but just as you posted he was sayin it again on the highlights show.
Coincidence

[stonemonkey]

? nope, Brundle mentioned that during the race.

Yeah he did, but just as you posted he was sayin it again on the highlights show.
Coincidence

LOL yep, I rarely watch the highlights.

[bud]

very unfair and a missed win for Rosberg and Williams

[EwanM]

very unfair and a missed win for Rosberg and Williams

Welcome back.

[bud]

very unfair and a missed win for Rosberg and Williams

Welcome back.

cheers

[McLaren Fan]

Hello again. It's great to see you back.

[nikon133]

I'm quite in favour of the current system. I know it can be unfair and ruin alot of people's races. (like Rosberg/Massa/Kubica today) but end of the day if they didn't have the rule, our races wouldn't be as interesting.

I understand why people dislike it. But I for one think it is a decent rule - plus it still uses 10 second pens which I think are more justified than Drive Thru rubbish

Well, I am also happy Alonso got his victory with a little help from safety car, but at the end of a day I would not like championship to be decided that way; plus, it even opens some (at least theoretical) possibilities for foul play. While not easy, it also would not be impossible to create a little accident with one driver (hoping that it will bring safety car out) at the best possible moment for the other driver, completely ruining competitors' strategies.

(And yeah, I think there are or at least there were, until recent, people in F1 willing to pull something like that in order to get a title)

[scotty]

It works both ways - in the old system the drivers got completely screwed if they pitted just before an SC period, pretty much the opposite of the current system. So in the previous rules, if say, Massa had a 25 second lead on Hamilton and Massa pitted, he'd be in the same place as Hamilton on the track. But if the safety car came out, Hamilton could just pit and catch Massa up while he was going slowly behind the safety car - basically getting a 'free pitstop'. Wait, does that make sense? It's very late.

[Hanwombat]

When you get banned Bud ?



WB

I think its totally unfair, run out of fuel or get a 10-sec stop-and-go penalty

[f1usa]

I'm quite in favour of the current system. I know it can be unfair and ruin alot of people's races. (like Rosberg/Massa/Kubica today) but end of the day if they didn't have the rule, our races wouldn't be as interesting.

I understand why people dislike it. But I for one think it is a decent rule - plus it still uses 10 second pens which I think are more justified than Drive Thru rubbish

It would be more fair if the 10 second stop-go was applied one lap after green, not within 3 laps.