cosi, what's your opinion on Alonso getting away in the lead with Massa in second place, and Massa being told to drive as slowly as possible and to hinder Vettel (who's in third and much faster) whenever he tries to overtake? Now, the same question but Massa's in 12th and Alonso has already lapped him. Vettel's in 2nd about to come up behind Massa.
I can see we're not going to agree on this one, but I just think the guy who earned P1 and a empty track in front of him at the start of the race should not have to potentially overtake several backmarkers (possibly the same cars more than once) in order to win the race. I think it's worth mentioning the differences in downforce levels result in completely different braking zones for the backmarkers. With so many potential overtakes on backmarkers, someone is bound to be caught off guard like Webber was in Valencia, especially if the backmarker's tyres are heavily worn. Teams try to find every possible advantage - and the removal of blue flags could have teams making agreements to help each other out, maybe certain drivers defend more aggressively to those they don't like. Teams can quite easily cheat in this respect, but it would be unlikely that they would get punished for it, because no blue flag means they have every right to defend. Even article 151.c would have little effect, because, how can you conclusively prove they were cheating? Just like team orders, you wouldn't be able to prove it.
My understanding is that a backmarker isn't even on the same piece of road and therefore shouldn't defend their position. A car leading the race shouldn't have to overtake a car 90-something seconds behind it, and it's just a quirk of circuit racing that these slower cars end up physically in front of the leader. I doubt a backmarker really has any desire to impede someone else's race, they need the blue flags to alert them that the car approaching isn't fighting them for position. Blue flags need to stay.
Jose hits it right on the head. If they are slow enough to be in that position, they should get the chance to change the front positions or positions.
If anyone wants a reminder why we have blue faags, look up Olivier Grouillard and the last 4 years of Rene Arnoux's career
Oh well. I thought it was an interesting point to raise but I've no wish to labour it if no one else agrees, except to say... ... I think backmarkers affecting the outcome of the leaders' races should be valued as a natural effect of circuit racing rather than eschewed as an unfortunate consequence. But (apparently) that's just me.
genji, I don't think backmarkers should have to be quite as obvious as they are now where they literally fall off the track to let the leaders through as it can look plain daft, , just a small reduction in speed at an appropriate point to give the leader the opportunity to pass would be sufficient.
Genji: no system is perfect but it has always been the 'duty' of a backmarker to avoid impeding the leaders, even back in the old days (although if their car is quicker; which is what we are sometimes seeing with these tyres; there should be no question of them being prevented from overtaking). *1] In the 'old days', honour was highly valued by almost every driver - it was, and still should be, part of the etiquette of racing. Unfortunately the pressures of high finance, as well as the odd individual having no concept of honour on track, facilitated a persuasion amongst teams for some convenient skulduggery which would see favours returned to those who were more 'helpful'. This opened the possibility of backhanders, bribery and even blackmail! *2] Human mentality aside, we have seen a gigantic increase in the dependency upon aerodynamics since the 'old days', when passing a slower car was, by comparison, an absolute cinch. The above factors were/are both evolutions of motor-racing which saw the need for a rule where previously none was required; in spite of it doing away with the gladiatorial ideal we might prefer. - Unfortunately such an ideal is unworkable in the modern world, particularly for *1 - at least, that's the way I see it! As for the Alonso/Massa scenario: I am against skulduggery in every sense but your question deserves a straight answer: if Massa's been lapped he should not impede Vettel; ideally, he would do the honourable thing without being required to do so by a rule which demands it; indeed this would be close to a return to genuinely 'old' values. But as we have seen, the world has moved on since a time when these questions did not exist, so it is no longer 'fair play'.
Yeah, cosi, I know it's a different world now and that F1 can't (and we probably wouldn't want it to) go back to the days of gentleman drivers. I do appreciate everyone's point that the potential for a slow back marker deciding a race result by letting (e.g.) their engine supplier's driver through easily while refusing to give way to the engine supplier's rival is something we don't want to see. I did suggest that, in place of ye olde values of honour and decency, the GPDA and FOTA could bash out an accepted driving etiquette but, on reflection, I suppose this would be even murkier than a 'clear' FIA sporting regulation (I really do believe that three marshal's posts is far too short, though - I'd like to see that requirement extended to within a lap or three). I also think the blue flags rule has contributed to the dependency on aerodynamics by removing the necessity for the leader to overtake anybody at all. I would also like the Lotus driver (who has to jump out of the way when he finds himself about to be lapped by Hamilton because they're on the same two-stop strategy, but who can legitimately hold up Alonso, who, on a one-stop strategy, comes out of his stop behind the Lotus on the same lap) to be able to interfere equally with the leaders whether he's being lapped or fighting for position. But - I'll get me coat on this thread.
Hahaha Genjiââ¬Â¦ As we both know, there's nothing wrong with being in a minority unless one chooses to remain myopically ignorant. You are never close to that which is why I think you're such an asset to any forum: you create great debate by having the courage of your convictions. P.S. I've hidden your coat so don't leave the party!
There is always the fact that a lower sister team (for example one using ferrari engines) could let a ferrari straight past and then fight tooth and nail against a McLaren. But overall I would prefer if they were removed. The more on track action the better. It gives the slow drivers a chance to use racecraft. The lower teams get more TV coverage which will entice sponsors. A dominant driver who has started from pole and disappeared into the sunset will be able to do some overtaking. It has the potential to keep the front runners together and create overtaking opportunities at the front.
