planetf1.com

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: What constitutes a straight, one long enough to be designated a DRS zone?

A straight is something without corners. I don't see why length is important as the following corner.

I'm also not saying that should be the only way. Just suggesting it as a good way.

So there are plenty of straights on a track were a driver can brake early in order for himself to be lapped and the overtaking driver doesn't have to wait a complete lap before passing on the main straight?

Yes?

So now i'm confused, how is this any different from the present blue flag system?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: What constitutes a straight, one long enough to be designated a DRS zone?

A straight is something without corners. I don't see why length is important as the following corner.

I'm also not saying that should be the only way. Just suggesting it as a good way.

So there are plenty of straights on a track were a driver can brake early in order for himself to be lapped and the overtaking driver doesn't have to wait a complete lap before passing on the main straight?

Yes?

So now i'm confused, how is this any different from the present blue flag system?

Blue flags currently seem to be shown when the lead driver gets within two seconds of the car in front. The car being lapped is then supposed to leap off the racing line and slow down to allow the lead car through.

I don't think Blue flags should be shown at all until the lapping car is withing 0.75-0.5 seconds and should be the one that has to move off the racing line.

Basically the onus on the lapping driver to get himself into a position to pass.

I can't quote your message above for some reason mikeyg123. I think it will be because of the length of all the other quotes put together.



I think what you last said would make sense. I just get really annoyed when there are blue flags for lapped drivers when they have just pitted and have fresh and faster tyres than the leaders. This happened in Spain with Haryanto. I think he got told be his team to move over when he was actually pulling away slightly as he had just pitted. He will have had to loose a HUGE amount of time if he had to slow and go off his racing line to let the leaders through. Another reason why the blue flags should only be shown if the leaders are within half a second (or around that) behind them. In the past few seasons, there have been a few too many occasions where lapped drivers have been shown blue flags when they have just left the pit lane and actually have a little more pace than the leaders. Sometimes, it has been enough to overtake if they were allowed to. I sometimes wonder what the lapped drivers will be thinking when this happens. It must be frustrating. If I am right, I remember Kobayashi unlapping himself from Vettel once. Vettel made a huge deal about this but I really didn't see what was wrong with it. If a Caterham could unlap a Red Bull, then it clearly was on better tyres at that point.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I can't quote your message above for some reason mikeyg123. I think it will be because of the length of all the other quotes put together.



I think what you last said would make sense. I just get really annoyed when there are blue flags for lapped drivers when they have just pitted and have fresh and faster tyres than the leaders. This happened in Spain with Haryanto. I think he got told be his team to move over when he was actually pulling away slightly as he had just pitted. He will have had to loose a HUGE amount of time if he had to slow and go off his racing line to let the leaders through. Another reason why the blue flags should only be shown if the leaders are within half a second (or around that) behind them. In the past few seasons, there have been a few too many occasions where lapped drivers have been shown blue flags when they have just left the pit lane and actually have a little more pace than the leaders. Sometimes, it has been enough to overtake if they were allowed to. I sometimes wonder what the lapped drivers will be thinking when this happens. It must be frustrating. If I am right, I remember Kobayashi unlapping himself from Vettel once. Vettel made a huge deal about this but I really didn't see what was wrong with it. If a Caterham could unlap a Red Bull, then it clearly was on better tyres at that point.

I agree I have no issue with drivers unlapping themselves. I remember Kubica almost cost Hamilton the title in 08 by doing that in the closing stages of Brazil because Vettel managed to squeeze by as well.

I also remember Hamilton unlapping Vettel in Germany a few years ago and Vettel and Horner crying like babies afterwards.

Great moments of drama.

Unless the rules have changed in the last few years there's nothing to stop a lapped driver unlapping themselves if they have the pace. Hamilton on fresh tyres unlapped himself against Vettel at Hockenheim in 2012.

I don't think the system is too bad at the moment. I think the stewards can sometimes be a bit quick to wave a blue flag at a driver but I'd rather backmarkers were forced to jump out the way than people getting their races compromised by the likes of Gutierrez driving like dicks.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I can't quote your message above for some reason mikeyg123. I think it will be because of the length of all the other quotes put together.



I think what you last said would make sense. I just get really annoyed when there are blue flags for lapped drivers when they have just pitted and have fresh and faster tyres than the leaders. This happened in Spain with Haryanto. I think he got told be his team to move over when he was actually pulling away slightly as he had just pitted. He will have had to loose a HUGE amount of time if he had to slow and go off his racing line to let the leaders through. Another reason why the blue flags should only be shown if the leaders are within half a second (or around that) behind them. In the past few seasons, there have been a few too many occasions where lapped drivers have been shown blue flags when they have just left the pit lane and actually have a little more pace than the leaders. Sometimes, it has been enough to overtake if they were allowed to. I sometimes wonder what the lapped drivers will be thinking when this happens. It must be frustrating. If I am right, I remember Kobayashi unlapping himself from Vettel once. Vettel made a huge deal about this but I really didn't see what was wrong with it. If a Caterham could unlap a Red Bull, then it clearly was on better tyres at that point.

I think the Vettel-Kobayashi incident wasjust Vettel being frustrated. He'd had a poor race and been given the order to move over for Ricciardo for the 2nd race running, his gripe with Kobayashi was more 'what is the point of unlapping yourself when your tyres will drop off in 2 laps and I'll overtake you again.'

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I can't quote your message above for some reason mikeyg123. I think it will be because of the length of all the other quotes put together.



I think what you last said would make sense. I just get really annoyed when there are blue flags for lapped drivers when they have just pitted and have fresh and faster tyres than the leaders. This happened in Spain with Haryanto. I think he got told be his team to move over when he was actually pulling away slightly as he had just pitted. He will have had to loose a HUGE amount of time if he had to slow and go off his racing line to let the leaders through. Another reason why the blue flags should only be shown if the leaders are within half a second (or around that) behind them. In the past few seasons, there have been a few too many occasions where lapped drivers have been shown blue flags when they have just left the pit lane and actually have a little more pace than the leaders. Sometimes, it has been enough to overtake if they were allowed to. I sometimes wonder what the lapped drivers will be thinking when this happens. It must be frustrating. If I am right, I remember Kobayashi unlapping himself from Vettel once. Vettel made a huge deal about this but I really didn't see what was wrong with it. If a Caterham could unlap a Red Bull, then it clearly was on better tyres at that point.

I agree I have no issue with drivers unlapping themselves. I remember Kubica almost cost Hamilton the title in 08 by doing that in the closing stages of Brazil because Vettel managed to squeeze by as well.

I also remember Hamilton unlapping Vettel in Germany a few years ago and Vettel and Horner crying like babies afterwards.

Great moments of drama.

I think Vettel and Horner were tiddled because Hamilton effectively acted as a rear gunner for Alonso a couple of seconds up the road. It may also have contributed to Button jumping Vettel at the final round of pitstops.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote: A straight is something without corners. I don't see why length is important as the following corner.

I'm also not saying that should be the only way. Just suggesting it as a good way.

So there are plenty of straights on a track were a driver can brake early in order for himself to be lapped and the overtaking driver doesn't have to wait a complete lap before passing on the main straight?

Yes?

So now i'm confused, how is this any different from the present blue flag system?

Blue flags currently seem to be shown when the lead driver gets within two seconds of the car in front. The car being lapped is then supposed to leap off the racing line and slow down to allow the lead car through.

I don't think Blue flags should be shown at all until the lapping car is withing 0.75-0.5 seconds and should be the one that has to move off the racing line.

Basically the onus on the lapping driver to get himself into a position to pass.

I don't think we really get to see how far the leaders are behind before the blue flags start to get shown, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

And then we get into the confused debate on "should the lead car have to take to the dirty part of the track to pass a lapper?"

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

I've no idea. I don't remember the specific case. In general I don't think it's Unreasonable in some circumstances for the car being lapped to take a lap to allow the leader to pass.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

I've no idea. I don't remember the specific case. In general I don't think it's Unreasonable in some circumstances for the car being lapped to take a lap to allow the leader to pass.

Here's an example from Grosjean's point of view where he was given the blue flag order even when the leader was well behind him:

"“When [the leaders] are coming on new tyres or the same tyres and they're faster it's easy,” Grosjean said. “I had Vettel behind me and he was about two tenths faster because he was on old tyres and I was on super-softs so of course it would take him 10 laps to close a two-second gap. I did a few laps in front and then we had a warning from Charlie [Whiting] and I let him by but it cost us 2.6s in one straight line so that was a lot of time lost.

“You are not happy because you're fighting to go to the points as well. But they are the leaders… I don't know. There is no right or wrong answer.”
Read more at http://www.crash.net/f1/news/232671/1/g ... UoVHZ4v.99"

That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

I've no idea. I don't remember the specific case. In general I don't think it's Unreasonable in some circumstances for the car being lapped to take a lap to allow the leader to pass.

Here's an example from Grosjean's point of view where he was given the blue flag order even when the leader was well behind him:

"“When [the leaders] are coming on new tyres or the same tyres and they're faster it's easy,” Grosjean said. “I had Vettel behind me and he was about two tenths faster because he was on old tyres and I was on super-softs so of course it would take him 10 laps to close a two-second gap. I did a few laps in front and then we had a warning from Charlie [Whiting] and I let him by but it cost us 2.6s in one straight line so that was a lot of time lost.

“You are not happy because you're fighting to go to the points as well. But they are the leaders… I don't know. There is no right or wrong answer.”
Read more at http://www.crash.net/f1/news/232671/1/g ... UoVHZ4v.99"

I wonder what Vettel would be like if he had been in Grosjean's position. Judging that he has been rather grumpy on the radio this season, I don't think he would be at all happy with the way the rules work with these blue flags.

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

Blinky McSquinty wrote:And then we get into the confused debate on "should the lead car have to take to the dirty part of the track to pass a lapper?"

Why not so long as he's being let by and i would say that happens quite a lot as the leaders pass on the inside of corners.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

I've no idea. I don't remember the specific case. In general I don't think it's Unreasonable in some circumstances for the car being lapped to take a lap to allow the leader to pass.

So obviously in that scenario there are no blue flag rules?

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:, with the Gutierrez/Hamilton situation, which I guess has triggered this debate, Hamilton was clearly less than a second behind Gutierrez after braking for the corner at the end of the main straight, yet was still behind Gutierrez as they went onto the main straight for the start of the next lap and Hamilton passed Gutierrez using DRS, Gutierrez clearly made no attempt to let Hamilton pass like he had been shown no blue flags.

I'm not sure in this instance that Gutierrez passed your criteria for not being shown a blue flag?

I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

I've no idea. I don't remember the specific case. In general I don't think it's Unreasonable in some circumstances for the car being lapped to take a lap to allow the leader to pass.

Here's an example from Grosjean's point of view where he was given the blue flag order even when the leader was well behind him:

"“When [the leaders] are coming on new tyres or the same tyres and they're faster it's easy,” Grosjean said. “I had Vettel behind me and he was about two tenths faster because he was on old tyres and I was on super-softs so of course it would take him 10 laps to close a two-second gap. I did a few laps in front and then we had a warning from Charlie [Whiting] and I let him by but it cost us 2.6s in one straight line so that was a lot of time lost.

“You are not happy because you're fighting to go to the points as well. But they are the leaders… I don't know. There is no right or wrong answer.”
Read more at http://www.crash.net/f1/news/232671/1/g ... UoVHZ4v.99"

I think the problem here is how much time is Vettel losing in the wake of Grosjean's car for him to decide how much faster Vettel is, we know that cars can start to experience problems when they are within 2 seconds on some tracks.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
I've know idea, but a lap to pass a backmarker on a twisty track like Hungary does not strike me as ridiculous.

I have seen drivers getting blue flags without having anyone near in a position to pass on countless occasions though.

Gutierrez clearly ignored the blue flags for a whole lap, I'm sure Hamilton was easily within a second of him, in this case you are saying he did no wrong and so what's the point in blue flags if drivers can simply ignore them?

I've no idea. I don't remember the specific case. In general I don't think it's Unreasonable in some circumstances for the car being lapped to take a lap to allow the leader to pass.

Here's an example from Grosjean's point of view where he was given the blue flag order even when the leader was well behind him:

"“When [the leaders] are coming on new tyres or the same tyres and they're faster it's easy,” Grosjean said. “I had Vettel behind me and he was about two tenths faster because he was on old tyres and I was on super-softs so of course it would take him 10 laps to close a two-second gap. I did a few laps in front and then we had a warning from Charlie [Whiting] and I let him by but it cost us 2.6s in one straight line so that was a lot of time lost.

“You are not happy because you're fighting to go to the points as well. But they are the leaders… I don't know. There is no right or wrong answer.”
Read more at http://www.crash.net/f1/news/232671/1/g ... UoVHZ4v.99"

I wonder what Vettel would be like if he had been in Grosjean's position. Judging that he has been rather grumpy on the radio this season, I don't think he would be at all happy with the way the rules work with these blue flags.

Maybe he would be just like Alonso and Button who seem to have no problems with moving over for blue flags, it seems to be more the young ego driven drivers who could be world champion if they had the right car that really have a problem.

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

I have also brought this scenario up.

pokerman wrote:

Blinky McSquinty wrote:And then we get into the confused debate on "should the lead car have to take to the dirty part of the track to pass a lapper?"

Why not so long as he's being let by and i would say that happens quite a lot as the leaders pass on the inside of corners.

The dirty part of the track seems to be dirtier than ever under the current Pirelli tyres.

I wonder if the 'performance tyres' Pirelli are creating for next year will leave less debris on track. Or maybe with the wider tyres there is more rubber to end up all over the track.
The dirty track is surely adding to why these guys don't want to move off line now under blue flags.

Something else that could help the back markers is if they made it so there was no overtaking while you were under Blue flags. So basically you have to slow and maintain the gap to the guy(s) you are fighting, let the leader(s) through, and then you can resume battle.

As for the example above of Grosjean and Vettel catching at 0.2 of a second a lap. If you are being lapped, you are a minimum of 70 seconds behind that driver, and on longer circuits, that could be up near 2 minutes. You owe it to the guy lapping to move over regardless of if you lose 2.6 seconds, which to me seems like Grosjean might have overestimated that time.
(70 seconds ahead in say 35 laps is 2 seconds a lap quicker on average, so what if he is only slightly faster in that phase. Get out of his way!)

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

Randine wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blinky McSquinty wrote:And then we get into the confused debate on "should the lead car have to take to the dirty part of the track to pass a lapper?"

Why not so long as he's being let by and i would say that happens quite a lot as the leaders pass on the inside of corners.

The dirty part of the track seems to be dirtier than ever under the current Pirelli tyres.

I wonder if the 'performance tyres' Pirelli are creating for next year will leave less debris on track. Or maybe with the wider tyres there is more rubber to end up all over the track.
The dirty track is surely adding to why these guys don't want to move off line now under blue flags.

Something else that could help the back markers is if they made it so there was no overtaking while you were under Blue flags. So basically you have to slow and maintain the gap to the guy(s) you are fighting, let the leader(s) through, and then you can resume battle.

As for the example above of Grosjean and Vettel catching at 0.2 of a second a lap. If you are being lapped, you are a minimum of 70 seconds behind that driver, and on longer circuits, that could be up near 2 minutes. You owe it to the guy lapping to move over regardless of if you lose 2.6 seconds, which to me seems like Grosjean might have overestimated that time.
(70 seconds ahead in say 35 laps is 2 seconds a lap quicker on average, so what if he is only slightly faster in that phase. Get out of his way!)

I don't quite understand why you owe that guy anything? Why does Grosjean owe Vettel simply because the latter has the good fortune to be in a better car?

Fiki wrote:

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I agree with this. Cars may still be held up during the race when strategy puts them behind a slower car that may be affiliated to a rival. Why is this considered an acceptable risk but not when a a car may be lapped?

For years backmarkers have moved out of the way when being lapped, purely as a courtesy to the leaders and at a time and place where they were not themselves being disadvantaged. I don't recall any particular catalyst that made it imperative to bring in the current blue flag rules so that back markers had to leap out of the way regardless within a given time frame. Does anybody know whether there was ever actually an issue or is this simply another case of the FIA creating a rule to fight a problem that didn't exist (like e.g. the minimum age rule, because clearly Max has shown that he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an F1 car )

pokerman wrote: Maybe he would be just like Alonso and Button who seem to have no problems with moving over for blue flags, it seems to be more the young ego driven drivers who could be world champion if they had the right car that really have a problem.

Big shock that a young driver desperately fighting for his career and to make some kind of mark is more concerned about losing time and points than a driver who has nothing to prove.

I don't understand what's so unfair about expecting a following driver to actually catch up to the backmarker before he is asked to allow the leader through?

Fiki wrote:

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I find the idea of the leaders having to fight tooth and nail against the back markers to be completely bonkers.

Zoue wrote:

Randine wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blinky McSquinty wrote:And then we get into the confused debate on "should the lead car have to take to the dirty part of the track to pass a lapper?"

Why not so long as he's being let by and i would say that happens quite a lot as the leaders pass on the inside of corners.

The dirty part of the track seems to be dirtier than ever under the current Pirelli tyres.

I wonder if the 'performance tyres' Pirelli are creating for next year will leave less debris on track. Or maybe with the wider tyres there is more rubber to end up all over the track.
The dirty track is surely adding to why these guys don't want to move off line now under blue flags.

Something else that could help the back markers is if they made it so there was no overtaking while you were under Blue flags. So basically you have to slow and maintain the gap to the guy(s) you are fighting, let the leader(s) through, and then you can resume battle.

As for the example above of Grosjean and Vettel catching at 0.2 of a second a lap. If you are being lapped, you are a minimum of 70 seconds behind that driver, and on longer circuits, that could be up near 2 minutes. You owe it to the guy lapping to move over regardless of if you lose 2.6 seconds, which to me seems like Grosjean might have overestimated that time.
(70 seconds ahead in say 35 laps is 2 seconds a lap quicker on average, so what if he is only slightly faster in that phase. Get out of his way!)

I don't quite understand why you owe that guy anything? Why does Grosjean owe Vettel simply because the latter has the good fortune to be in a better car?

Thinking more about this situation between Grosjean and Vettel, in this case could the early blue flags have been influenced by Vettel's own persistent whining, blue flags, blue flags?

This is Vettel trying to maximise everything and maybe Charlie needs to wear some ear plugs?

Zoue wrote:

Fiki wrote:

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I agree with this. Cars may still be held up during the race when strategy puts them behind a slower car that may be affiliated to a rival. Why is this considered an acceptable risk but not when a a car may be lapped?

For years backmarkers have moved out of the way when being lapped, purely as a courtesy to the leaders and at a time and place where they were not themselves being disadvantaged. I don't recall any particular catalyst that made it imperative to bring in the current blue flag rules so that back markers had to leap out of the way regardless within a given time frame. Does anybody know whether there was ever actually an issue or is this simply another case of the FIA creating a rule to fight a problem that didn't exist (like e.g. the minimum age rule, because clearly Max has shown that he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an F1 car )

Basically if you are about to be lapped then you are not in the same race and you don't have the right to compete against the leaders, if you want equal rights then drive a bit faster, the fact that it's not possible given the car makes no difference.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Maybe he would be just like Alonso and Button who seem to have no problems with moving over for blue flags, it seems to be more the young ego driven drivers who could be world champion if they had the right car that really have a problem.

Big shock that a young driver desperately fighting for his career and to make some kind of mark is more concerned about losing time and points than a driver who has nothing to prove.

I don't understand what's so unfair about expecting a following driver to actually catch up to the backmarker before he is asked to allow the leader through?

No more like young driver not use to being lapped in the junior series has a problem with his ego.

I think you are a bit inconsistent with your reasoning, i gave an example were a driver caught up to a back marker and was behind him for a full lap before making a DRS pass and you thought that was alright.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Fiki wrote:

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I agree with this. Cars may still be held up during the race when strategy puts them behind a slower car that may be affiliated to a rival. Why is this considered an acceptable risk but not when a a car may be lapped?

For years backmarkers have moved out of the way when being lapped, purely as a courtesy to the leaders and at a time and place where they were not themselves being disadvantaged. I don't recall any particular catalyst that made it imperative to bring in the current blue flag rules so that back markers had to leap out of the way regardless within a given time frame. Does anybody know whether there was ever actually an issue or is this simply another case of the FIA creating a rule to fight a problem that didn't exist (like e.g. the minimum age rule, because clearly Max has shown that he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an F1 car )

Basically if you are about to be lapped then you are not in the same race and you don't have the right to compete against the leaders, if you want equal rights then drive a bit faster, the fact that it's not possible given the car makes no difference.

Where does that rule come from? I don't remember reading anywhere that being lapped means you are no longer in the race?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Fiki wrote:

_Rogue_ wrote:

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I agree with this. Cars may still be held up during the race when strategy puts them behind a slower car that may be affiliated to a rival. Why is this considered an acceptable risk but not when a a car may be lapped?

For years backmarkers have moved out of the way when being lapped, purely as a courtesy to the leaders and at a time and place where they were not themselves being disadvantaged. I don't recall any particular catalyst that made it imperative to bring in the current blue flag rules so that back markers had to leap out of the way regardless within a given time frame. Does anybody know whether there was ever actually an issue or is this simply another case of the FIA creating a rule to fight a problem that didn't exist (like e.g. the minimum age rule, because clearly Max has shown that he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an F1 car )

Basically if you are about to be lapped then you are not in the same race and you don't have the right to compete against the leaders, if you want equal rights then drive a bit faster, the fact that it's not possible given the car makes no difference.

Where does that rule come from? I don't remember reading anywhere that being lapped means you are no longer in the race?

It's a basic principle of racing starting with kart racing.

http://go-kart-source.com/go-kart-flags/
https://teamkarting.co.uk/what-do-the-f ... -2016-3-14

I remember racing with blue flag systems when i use to race in karts.

Also i believe in International karting when a competitor is shown a blue flag he has to drop out of the race, hence the term no longer being in the same race.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Fiki wrote:While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I agree with this. Cars may still be held up during the race when strategy puts them behind a slower car that may be affiliated to a rival. Why is this considered an acceptable risk but not when a a car may be lapped?

For years backmarkers have moved out of the way when being lapped, purely as a courtesy to the leaders and at a time and place where they were not themselves being disadvantaged. I don't recall any particular catalyst that made it imperative to bring in the current blue flag rules so that back markers had to leap out of the way regardless within a given time frame. Does anybody know whether there was ever actually an issue or is this simply another case of the FIA creating a rule to fight a problem that didn't exist (like e.g. the minimum age rule, because clearly Max has shown that he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an F1 car )

Basically if you are about to be lapped then you are not in the same race and you don't have the right to compete against the leaders, if you want equal rights then drive a bit faster, the fact that it's not possible given the car makes no difference.

Where does that rule come from? I don't remember reading anywhere that being lapped means you are no longer in the race?

It's a basic principle of racing starting with kart racing.

http://go-kart-source.com/go-kart-flags/

I remember racing with blue flag systems when i use to race in karts.

That doesn't exactly say you are no longer in the race, though. The quote is:

Blue – A blue flag indicates overtaking. If you are shown this flag, yield the racing line to the faster go karts that are approaching. It’s important to keep an eye out and be cautious as to not cause an accident.

I don't see anything there that says jump out of the way regardless of what it might do to your own race, or that you should consider yourself out of the race. In fact, in some racing series it's not even mandatory, but a courtesy.

I understand the principle of the blue flag is not to hold another driver up, but that's not the question I've been asking. What was the catalyst for the current interpretation in F1 that a driver should leap out of the way as if stung and that a driver should compromise his own race in favour of a faster car? Blue flags have been round for decades but the rule saying if you're given a blue flag you're a second class citizen is comparatively recent

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Maybe he would be just like Alonso and Button who seem to have no problems with moving over for blue flags, it seems to be more the young ego driven drivers who could be world champion if they had the right car that really have a problem.

Big shock that a young driver desperately fighting for his career and to make some kind of mark is more concerned about losing time and points than a driver who has nothing to prove.

I don't understand what's so unfair about expecting a following driver to actually catch up to the backmarker before he is asked to allow the leader through?

No more like young driver not use to being lapped in the junior series has a problem with his ego.

I think you are a bit inconsistent with your reasoning, i gave an example were a driver caught up to a back marker and was behind him for a full lap before making a DRS pass and you thought that was alright.

Actually I said I hadn't seen it so couldn't possibly make a judgement.

I have consistently said that the leader should be expected to catch the back marker before blue flags are shown and that in certain situations it would not always be unreasonable for a driver to take a lap before allowing the lead driver to pass.

I'm afraid I don't understand why a leader is more entitled to not lose time than a back marker?

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Fiki wrote:

_Rogue_ wrote:

Fiki wrote:That's a very good example of why I believe these blue flag rules should never have been introduced in the first place.

The problem that comes without some blue flag rules is that you can easily come across the problem that affiliated teams might well favour 1 out of 2 drivers closely racing to give their favoured driver/team an advantage. It was something seen from time to time with Toro Rosso and Red bull so at least the blue flag rules minimise the possibilites of a driver being unfairly held up. I don't think anyone could argue that other teams should have the option to hold up one driver whilst showing another the red carpet straight through however i have no issues with lapped cars that are able to unlap themselves from doing so.

p.s. i am only using the Red bull Toro rosso affiliation as an example. It could just as easily be a ferrari or Mercedes engined teams that might be more inclined to help out likewise engined teams if being lapped.

While that possibility exists, I don't see it as a reason to have the F1 blue flag rule. I see no good reason to allow front runners past backmarkers without having to race them. Why should a front runner be allowed to defend, but not a backmarker? Isn't it stupid enough the front runner can deploy DRS against the backmarker?

I realize the potential problem with affiliated teams, and I well remember the claim by Fontana that Ferrari asked him to hold Villeneuve up at Jerez 1997, but I don't feel that possibility should be used as a defence for the current blue flag rule. If a backmarker is putting up a successful, but fair defence, then he and his car/sponsors should get all the air time they can get.

I agree with this. Cars may still be held up during the race when strategy puts them behind a slower car that may be affiliated to a rival. Why is this considered an acceptable risk but not when a a car may be lapped?

For years backmarkers have moved out of the way when being lapped, purely as a courtesy to the leaders and at a time and place where they were not themselves being disadvantaged. I don't recall any particular catalyst that made it imperative to bring in the current blue flag rules so that back markers had to leap out of the way regardless within a given time frame. Does anybody know whether there was ever actually an issue or is this simply another case of the FIA creating a rule to fight a problem that didn't exist (like e.g. the minimum age rule, because clearly Max has shown that he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an F1 car )

Basically if you are about to be lapped then you are not in the same race and you don't have the right to compete against the leaders, if you want equal rights then drive a bit faster, the fact that it's not possible given the car makes no difference.

Is that also the case for drivers unlapping themselves? Or do they some how get their rights back?

pokerman wrote:Basically if you are about to be lapped then you are not in the same race and you don't have the right to compete against the leaders, if you want equal rights then drive a bit faster, the fact that it's not possible given the car makes no difference.

Of course they are in the same race! Have you forgotten Belgium 1998, when McLaren sent Coulthard out again after repairing his car? The race is only run when the race is run, not before. And as long as a backmarker defends in a fair way, I see no problem. If a faster driver can't get past a backmarker in a slower car, he should go on a holiday and give the reserve driver a chance.

I was searching for a for a quote from Ken Tyrrell, basically telling a driver "I don't pay you to drive off line", or something similar, and came across this article from 2010. Same argument we're having now. I agree with the sentiments of the article, btw.


https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ule-change

Argentum wrote:I was searching for a for a quote from Ken Tyrrell, basically telling a driver "I don't pay you to drive off line", or something similar, and came across this article from 2010. Same argument we're having now. I agree with the sentiments of the article, btw.


https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ule-change

yes, good article, and I never thought I'd say that about something in the Guardian. But I agree with the sentiment, too

pokerman wrote:It's a basic principle of racing starting with kart racing.

http://go-kart-source.com/go-kart-flags/
https://teamkarting.co.uk/what-do-the-f ... -2016-3-14

I remember racing with blue flag systems when i use to race in karts.

Also i believe in International karting when a competitor is shown a blue flag he has to drop out of the race, hence the term no longer being in the same race.

I just had a look in the old programmes I bought at the Belgian GP. Those for 1989, '91 and '92 all have the same text in French explaining what the flags mean.
For the blue flag it reads: "Attention! Une ou plussieurs voitures plus rapides vous suivent de près et vont tenter un dépassement." My translation: "Attention! One or more quicker cars are following you closely and will try to pass." This is only the race programme, perhaps somebody could dig up the official FIA rule from those days?

I don't know why kartraces would follow the silly "modern" F1 blue flag rule, rather than just pointing out somebody fast is running close behind.

Just as I feel the SC falsifies the racing and the race results, so does the current blue flag rule.

I would love to see a return to drivers having to pass and fights for position influenced by how good an overtaker you are, but hand in hand with this, something would have to be done about the self peeling tyres. If there is only one line on the corner, neither the lapped car or the passing car, or indeed the one fighting him will want to step into the bog off the beaten path and get their running shoes muddy.