There are two reasons I think blue flags should be removed, or at least make a driver's response to them optional. 1. Forcing the 'best' drivers to have to overtake back markers will contribute to the racing. 2. It gives faster drivers stuck behind slower drivers an additional chance to overtake when the slower driver ahead encounters traffic. 3. With DRS is there any reason now to ask back markers to jump out of the way? No, three, there are three reasons - oh, look, let's just come in again. Can anyone think of any other reasons or, perversely, reasons why F1 should keep its little blue flag rule?
1. Forcing the 'best' drivers to have to overtake back markers will contribute to the racing. Will give also give a good indication on their raw skill on track. (How many back-markers they can lap / through skill). 2. It gives faster drivers stuck behind slower drivers an additional chance to overtake when the slower driver ahead encounters traffic. Also gives a slower driver more of an involvement in the race, I don't know about you but I feel sorry for them sometimes when they are bullied but faster drivers swearing and waving their arms at them. Good article mate.
There is a difference between a passionate follower of a team and a fanboy twat with no facts or stats to back his ideas. You know where I stand now mate No problem mate, criticism should be taken if it is dished out.
I accept that Blue flags are in place for safety reasons. Also I would feel hard done by as a fan if the lead was changed because of over blocking by a backmarker
Whilst I feel blue flags should stay to warn the slower cars that a fast car is approaching (to avoid them getting caught out), I would prefer if the faster driver showed he was faster and lapped the slow car without it moving out of the way. Keep blue flags, but only as a warning, not as a rule!
there should be a rule that lapped cars aren't allowed to overtake whilst the car they ar eracing is on a blue. I think it's unfair sometimes that, say, a guy fighting for 8th loses out because the guy in 9th follows the lapping car through the gap the 8th place has been forced to give, it's not my idea of 'racing'.
I agree that we are appear to be entering a new era where Blues may be perceived as less relevant than they were. Blue Flags became ever more important as overtaking became more difficult; long ago they were unnecessary. It's early days of course, but if DRS was not restricted to just one part of the track, overtaking would genuinely be back to the days of old and make blues pretty well redundant. I think we must bear in mind that regulations are always behind the times. An analogy can be drawn with science which always studies data to 'catch up' in order to track the developments of reality; after all, without the evidence, science cannot progress - and neither can any sensible rule book.
I'm not really talking about blocking - the about-to-be-lapped slower car ahead would still be subject to FIA Driving standards such as not weaving. However, if a backmarker successfully defends against the leader then I think that's fair enough, however unlikely.
I just dont think the back markers should be used as pawns for our entertainment. The system works just as well by moving them out of the way of the leaders and letting the race continue as it was.
Genji, If a driver is so slow that they are about to be lapped, why should they have the privilege of defending? If they are slow enough to be in that position, they should get out of the way, instead of potentially ruining a frontrunner's race - and on tracks where overtaking is difficult like Monaco, the best drivers shouldn't have to worry about cars they are already ahead of - and the teams shouldn't have to take backmarkers into account when deciding strategy. With so many slow cars on the grid, the last thing a top driver should have to deal with is a lot of traffic.
also you have to note that some backmarker teams are allied with top teams and could be called apon to spoil a rivals race
they generally didn't defend, they'd just let them past on the straights, (except maybe Jaques Laffite). That was one of the things that made Senna so good, dealing with the traffic. I seem to remember the blue flag back then, as more of a warning of the cars approach than an instruction.
I think Jose makes a reasonable point, especially within the politics of F1, which might see some drivers or teams being deliberately choosy in who they make life easier for. But there is one other point well worth bearing in mind and not previously mentioned, which supports Genji's idea to some extent: Blue Flags have formed part of the traditional flag system to tell a driver that a faster car is behind; NOT NECESSARILY THAT HE IS BEING LAPPED. - And should A lapped driver find him/herself approaching a slower leader, the blue flag is shown to the leader, simply to inform him/her that he is being caught by a faster car NOT TO TELL HIM TO GET OUT OF THE WAY! *The above argument stems from the original meaning of the blue flag; not how it is presently used in F1 (somewhat artificially, but very much in the interests of an aerodynamically dependant 'Formula').
If a driver is capable of defending he should be entitled to defend. Why should a faster car receive the privilege of having a slower car just moved aside for them like a pawn? The use of blue flags in F1 is just another contributing factor to the aerodynamic problem. If other cars are moved out of the leader's way then why design a car that can overtake rather than a car that just goes faster through the air than all the others? Getting past backmarkers should be a challenge, not a right. All drivers should be entitled to run their own races, not pander to the leaders' wishes, in my opinion, anyway. Dealing with traffic is exactly what drivers should be doing, whether that's lapping or overtaking. If the cars were dangerously slow then I could see your point of view but the 107% rule prevents that. Backmarkers are supposed to play a part in the outcome of races, in my opinion. I think that's fundamental to circuit racing.
But you could have front runners having underhand deals with the lower teams to slow their rivals down if it came to it. IMO stick to the blue flags.
But that's the thing - they are backmarkers. Therefore they shouldn't have the right to influence the race of a frontrunner. If two backmarkers are battling for position, and a faster car comes to lap them, they should give way - as the faster car should not have the added challenge of overtaking these cars whilst trying to beat others on different strategies. If they are in P1, surely they should have the right to control the race as they please without some backmarker ruining it for them. I also think we should take into account the temperament of the driver - if he is in a HRT (and inevitably will get lapped by the entire field), they might defend too aggressively on one occasion and the quicker driver's race is over. I'd rather not see incidents lke Piquet and Salazar. Also, dirty tactics could play a role - remember Fontana cheating for Schumacher in 97? Teams like Red Bull could use this to their advantage with Torro Rosso.
They're drivers who qualified their cars for the race. They should be entitled to run their own race, not have to jump out the way because another driver wants a free pass past them. Obviously, the current situation (with the current rules) supports your opinion rather than mine but it wasn't ever thus. It was once the decision of the 'backmarker' when or if he let the leaders through. I just think that, overall, the way blue flags are used in F1 these days has had a negative effect on racing and competition. I just don't agree, Jose. I don't think any driver should be given any advantage over any other driver by the regulations. It's down to their teams to give them an advantage, not the marshals. Yes, ok, but drivers like that would quickly get a rum reputation and the stewards would take a dim view of them. There is also now FOTA which is potentially the strongest team association F1 has had. Between the modern implementation of driving standards guidance, the cordiality within FOTA and the GPDA briefings, the only real risk would be from intense rivalries. Again, FOTA might come to some agreement in this respect but teams ask and sometimes receive favours up and down the pit lane. I couldn't see Ferrari helping McLaren out but I could see Williams giving them a hand. I think that all adds to the intrigue, but I can understand why you might have a different opinion.
The thing I think is perfectly reasonable, if slightly off centre for this topic, is that a 'back-marker' who finds his car is faster than someone on a different lap is perfectly entitled to overtake. This has always been the case. Indeed, there are some great stories of heroic drives where unlapping has led to amazing results: Jim Clark for example. But I do agree that in modern day F1, backmarkers should not be allowed to deliberately hinder the leaders and that there needs to be a system to ensure it is done as fairly as possible; since I am against foul play in every circumstance, including a system which is not rigorous enough to police it. In my opinion, the FIA over-regulate often enough; but the back-marker rule works pretty well as it stands at the moment (so long as back-markers continue to be allowed to unlap themselves).
