@Dennis Mahaney Every time Bottas got a team order from Merc to let Lewis Past or slow down their strategist, James Vowel (not sure if that is the correct spelling) came on the radio saying "Valtteri, it's James...(insert team order here)" and now he won Bottas had a little bit of revenge saying "James, it's Valtteri"
Thanks again for another great video Marc! Your channel is definitely a go-to following the race. I don't know what the future holds for you, but you would be such a great addition to the Sky team providing technical insight. You have a unique skill of breaking down the complexities of F1 in a way that is appropriate for new and veteran fans alike. Additionally, watching your videos feels so personal, like talking about F1 with an old friend rather than the sportscaster nonsense! I think I speak for all your fans when I say that be it your RU-vid channel, or a television/streaming role, you have all of our support behind you and we wish you much success!
If you watch onboard with Daniel Ricciardo in Japan, he was using a paddle on the top left hand side of his steering wheel before heavy braking corners. He would click it once before the braking zone, so this is possibly his brake bias adjuster. (His gear shift paddles are lower down.)
About the DRS being open through 130R , i wish u referred to how the Silverstone T1 DRS was taken away after the FiA realised it's danger when drivers began snapping off at the high speed T1 and going to the gravel...
Nice vlog as always. Not that it is entirely relevant to an F1 discussion, but in reference to your points about Vettel's 'Jump start', in Athletics when 100m sprinters 'wiggle' in their blocks, it is considered a false start, and there is no tolerance allowed for 'interpretation' - just the reading from the sensors in the blocks. How should it be in F1? Actually I think the drivers should be asked to create the rule, as the impact of a driver 'jumping the start' has most impact on other drivers in their immediate vicinity.
correct. reason being it distracts other competitors which might make them jump the gun. track and field starts are however based on auditory reaction, so i suppose one would react more strongly to a visual distraction. i would imagine f1 drivers focus their eyes on the lights and not other cars, but obviously i can't speak for the drivers. so i think you're right on, the drivers should have a say in just how distracting someone else's twitch is, and wether it's at all likely they themselves would also jump the start from that.
I'm split on the jumpstart. On one hand, I want the rule to be clear that any movement is a breach of regulations. However the penalty should only be applied if the driver continues to move as the light go out, Kimi and Seb both stopped and started again and this half-second delay in the crucial time was already a penalty enough in my eyes as they've lost places.
Bottas jumped the start at the 2017 Austrian GP from pole and gained an advantage by doing it and he wasn't penalized because of the same reason, his car started moving before the lights went out but the lights did go out before he crossed the sensor. He basically anticipated the start perfectly and gained an advantage within the rules and this same discussion happened and the rule hasn't changed since so I agree with not penalising Seb today. I am okay with the rule the way it is, it gives them a tolerance for adjustment and if you try anticipating the lights then you take a big risk of either getting a penalty or penalising yourself like Seb did today.
With the Vettel start, if the FIA allow movement of this sort then drivers will be able to 'game' the other drivers around them to trick them into false starts.
@@F1Elvis Absolutely but it could well happen and that's why it should be tightly controlled. Maybe by allowing minor movement up to (Say) the third red light coming on and then nothing after that?
Ray, that happened in swimming where on the blocks when someone moves the person next to them often reacts and falls in. The person who moved first - even if they stopped again - is D/Q'd and sometimes the other one is - some times not.
best way to shake up the weekend in my opinion have 2 1 and a half hour practice sessions on Friday one Saturday and have Quali and the race on the sunday because having the added pressure of making it count or binning it and potentially missing the race made that one of the most exciting quali’s ive watched in a while and that was before all the red flags!
When I see DRS in operation, it seems to put the car in front at a disadvantage and mitigates any great driving or whatever reason they are ahead. Personally I do not like it. I understand the purpose, but it does not make me feel good as a spectator. I wonder what else could be implemented to promote closer competition and passing.
Totally agree but with a car following another car through a corner losses around 50% downforce therefore cant get close enough to overtake on the straight. The only way in my opinion is to limit the amount of aero downforce or air disturbance behind that the cars produces. More mechanical grip such as wider tires and less aero downforce is the only way i can think of. My biggest issue is the best drivers (supposedly) driving 4 seconds a lap slower than the car car actually do due to limiting fuel consumption and tire management. I want to see the best flat out every corner, every lap. That promotes small mistakes that can loose them positions. Take away teams of engineers informing the driver about temps too high and other issues unless its safety related. The driver is now only a small part of the cars running quickly with an army of engineer analyzing the cars data. Drivers to manage the whole car. The more complicated the car the more the driver needs to think about those systems the harder the car is to drive. Lights out, driver get to the finish as quick as you can. In my opinion.
@@Gthornby Yeah, I totally agree. I meant for the 2021 regulations, I think they should get rid of it or make it a once per lap kind of thing, as the cars will have a lot less dirtier air with the new rules. The cars now, still just have too much dirty air(despite improvements this year) on some tracks, and DRS on those tracks like Catyluna and Paul Ricard are the only reason(most of the time) anything gets done.
Yeah not a bad idea to be honest. Maybe also apply it to the checkered flag signal as well, which ended the race a lap early and changed some positions. They changed from the flag wave to the signal after Canada last year, now the signal also caused an error. They should just allow the stewards to bypass that signal too in situations like this.
Tbf I don’t see the problem with his movement on the start line, he was in his box and stationary at the time the lights went out Also discretion is a difficult thing in motorsport
A brilliant analysis on each of those. Re the jump start, I'd say that your first comment is the correct one. If he is stationary and still inside his box then he hasn't "started" and no benefit gained.If he was rolling and still inside the box, then yes a penalty but the car was stationary and in its position behind the line when the lights went out.
Bottas got away with a jump start last year in Austria because he was within the tolerance. Scott Redding in BSB got away with a jump start for exactly the same reason as vettel.
The turn 1 incident was probably borderline, and I would have been fine to let it go as a racing incident, I don't see much of a difference as we have seen with other first lap incidents. What I think is inexcusable and should have resulted in a Black Flag disqualification from the race on lap 2 was Charles and Ferrari's decision to leave the car out with clear damage... When the broken endplate came off it destroyed Lewis wing mirror... less than a meter more to the center of his car and that piece could have gone through the opening in the halo and hit Lewis in the head, possibly causing serious injury or worse. It also ruined Lando's race and cost McLaren a points finish as the debris got taken up in his brake ducts and damaged them. A ten-second penalty and a fine is nonsense compared to the implications of what that decision could have resulted in.
Yeah it was spineless a non punishment - but its been happening for a long time. I really fear we're going to see another driver hit by debris before the stewards act.
Time penalties after the race can also work against you. If there is a safety car within the last few laps, or worst of all ending under safety car, you could drop down significantly. Then there is nothing you can do, as opposed to an earlier penalty. i.e. race harder during the rest of the race
Marc, first thank you. I discovered your videos this year and you have made F1 even more interesting to me than it was already. You have made me a more knowledgeable fan. My question is what is your favorite circuit and why? Thanks again. Just finished your book too. When is the next one coming out?
What if there were light/laser beams (similar to staging for drag racing) at the front edge of each grid box instead of a pressure sensor under the tires? Each drivers reaction time (time between lights out and front tire crossing light beam) can then be measured and maybe even displayed to viewers as a "driver skill."
For the sake of the spectacle, a driver being stationary and inside their box should be all that matters for a jump start, but because it can make other drivers think they should go I think the rule as it is works fine, we'll just have to trust the sensors (which I'm sure will get improved further over time).
Hi Marc, thanks for answering my question. I agree with ur answer but the only DRS zone on main straight also doesn't have a braking point at its end (turn 1), tho it's not as quick as 130R. Thanks
@@MFKR696 Perhaps you can clarify something for me as I really only got into this sport in earnest this year. IF a team is using a system to aid the driver in operation of the car in any way, doesn't that go against "The Driver will drive the car alone and unaided" rule? Wouldn't that go against the No Foul part as it would be breaking the rules that all teams have to follow? Second, given that the above scenario is true, wouldn't that mean that all points won by said them would be, for lack of a better term right now, illegally obtained? IF that is the case, wouldn't go against the No Harm part as that team is gaining points that other teams would be able to get and have better seasons? Appreciate your time.
@@suribachi8698 I personally have no problem with a system that allows the crew to modify the car's settings on the move so that the driver can just drive. If F1 would allow such a thing, then everyone would be doing it eventually, and then it would be okay. It's just more innovation-stifling bullshit. You're making things more complicated than they need to be. KISS: Keep it simple, stupid. I'm not at all concerned with what "the other teams" want. My interest goes towards those who try to innovate, not those who complain about said innovation. They need to realize a simple fact: Life is not fair, and it doesn't care what you want. Take your eyes off the ball for a second and the rest of the world will pass you by. It applies to racing as much as it applies to everything else. I honestly don't care if the playing-field is made a little bit "unfair" for a period of time until everyone else catches up. Halting the process altogether prevents that from ever happening, which keeps the sport at the same dull low that it's been at for the past while. Tis why they say "Doctrine is a haven for the unintelligent and unimaginative." Those that rigidly adhere to doctrine will never get any better at what they do, and they will never advance the sport. Without people like that, all types of racing would be light-years ahead of where they are now, except for maybe Nascar. There's only so much you can do with a stock-car that's designed to do nothing but turn left lol.
@@MFKR696 a computer system that changes setting on the go for the driver is hardly innovative. It's been around for years outside F1 and doesn't require innovative technology. It also takes away from the driver managing the car and pushing it to the limit. Might as well watch racing between self driving cars....
I totally get the Stewards reasoning for not awarding a penalty to Vettel. Like you say the car can move for a number of reasons. But when a driver intentionally releases the clutch to go, but gets it wrong, regardless of if he stopped the car or not he jumped the start. And having watched both Kimi's and Seb's I can't see how 1/4 tire turn and 1 full tire turn is any different. In Moto gp this year they have penalized for jump start if you react to quickly to the lights.
@@F1Elvis I like the way you put it in your video. And I agree. But he did intentionally release the clutch to early. That should have been a penalty not just the car movement.
I'd love to see them do 130r with Drs open 🤘 fully committed potential for mistakes there's loads of run off anyway and with the chicane at the end potential outbraking. Think it would work
In a running race, say 100m sprint. A false start is determined by pressure on the starting blocks, so it doesn't matter if you cross the starting line or not. If the pressure sensor detects within normal human reaction time of the gun going off then you are out.
Ben Carter I saw the car move and stop again. Immediately thought a false start because others did not move. Watched the replay and could not really see if the lights were out. Stewards came up with the story he stayed in the box or similar words. I never read the rules about the start just assumed they were not allowed to move. Good to hear this problem was solved in athletics. Thanks for sharing.
@@cf6282 it would make sense to do similar with a torque sensor or something. Any torque sensed from the time the last red light comes on is a false start, simple.
i'd expect the tolerance has to be there and has to be this big because of the on clutch roll for the cars when they're stationary before the start, otherwise we'd get 15 jump starts every race
At 27:21 you're wrong, the DRS system makes the rear wing automatically shut down when the driver releases the throttle pedal, not when they hit the brakes, so in that regard, and considering that in Russia turn 12 is easely flat with DRS, i think 130R could be driver with the DRS wide open without risk.
15:50 @Marc Priestley In sprinting ANY movement before the gun is considered a false start. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_start#Athletics_(track_and_field) and www.liveabout.com/false-start-rule-history-controversies-3259158 They discuss the disqualification in 1996 on Linford Christie for false starting BEFORE the gun.
While I would agree that Vettel was still in the box and standing still when the lights went out and that he ultimately did not gain an advantage, I also think that the rules are clear and that the most simple solution is the best one. Saying that there is a tolerance of some amount just makes it more complicated and up to interpretation. However just saying that if you move before the lights you get penalized is very easy and leaves no room for interpretation.
While I agree that, if true, such action would indeed be illegal and the team should be penalized appropriately, I also find it absolutely absurd that we have gotten to this point in F1. There should be exactly 3 Rules in F1: 1. Vehicles must contain a human driver, and travel the course while maintaining contact with the ground. 2. The vehicle must not kill the driver. 3. The vehicles must not kill other drivers. The amount of regulation in F1 at this point is getting silly.
Barring two races, and the dominant Mercedes till Austria, we have had one hell of a race season. Even Quali has had a couple of must watch TV moments. As for the Saturday off, it allowed me to come from work, get the shopping and then watch the Rangers v Liverpool legends game. Got an early night, got up early-ish and then watch Qualifying first then do a F1 game type shift into the race on Sunday. Looking at the condensation of the race weekend, why not just totally ban teams having a mission control? Also ban them using high speed satellite links and fibre optic connections? Have the circuit have enough connections via high speed internet, capped at 100 meg? Also ban the engineers taking laptops ‘home’ to the hotels overnight? Limit access to their data on a weekend? Also limit the amount of sensors delivering live data to just 32, with the rest being stored on a solid state drive or two (backup) in the car that can be downloaded after a session. Ban all tyre sensors, apparat from the tyre pressure sensors as they are needed for safety. I’ll ask a quick question, on qualifying like what we had at the weekend, would it be worth it to allow the teams/cars a set or two more of the Softs if P3 is cancelled?
There’s some clips out there of Vettel checking out the gap from the front wing to the ground on his car vs Valterri’s car. How much do the drivers understand about the aerodynamics of the car or generally the technical aspects?
Vettel is very technical and understands quite a bit more than many on the grid; Nico (Rosberg) was like that as well, he had an engineering degree I believe. Others just have a raw driving skill and just show up to drive.
Elvis i love your analysis and your videos. Keep them coming mate. Having said that, please please get a microphone (the type that clip on to your shirt or something) to improve the sound. Also i am no director but this low light environments are not ideal for videos as the video just looks all yellow. Other than that i really enjoy all the details you provide. You rock!
Looked to me like Leclerc started to spin his tires at T1 and over corrected. The rear kicks to the inside of the turn right before he makes contact with Max. At least that’s what I remember seeing.
Reminds me of Williams old suspension system, Oh and I bet Renault use a radio signal, they used a radio signal for their race starts back in the day, so it wouldn't surprise me if they did that and Sports Pesa Racing Point have intercepted the signal.
Mark , come on SV’s jump start IS A JUMP START. As you said , if there’s a tolerance of a jump start, the manufacturer will work to it. It was a tactical move to get in the head of the other drivers. It’s just not on . Oh dear .
On the case of Vettel....In my opinion.....a move is a move, which should be translated to a jump start in any case....he moved before the lights went off, this was clearly visible...He should had got the drive trough penalty..
Hi mark, honest question: did you have a look at leclercs onboard? Don't necessarily agree with the penalty, but I do feel that he was steering towards the outside.
It's true that the teams couldn't run the hard tires and had no data which affected Ferrari's and Mercedes's decisions. Additionally as was pointed out by the Sky team, having qualifying on Sunday limited running all of the race simualtions. However, those were minor influences compared to the Leclerc Verstappen crash and the failure of Leclerc to pit with damage or being quickly penalized. That had the largest effect upon the race as a whole.
A follow-up question to drivers requesting 'more power' is "why can't the driver turn up the power whenever they want?" It's because power units must be reliable enough to last for a specified number of races. Increasing the output close to the maximum for an extended amount of time puts an exponential strain on components that can lead to catastrophic failure of one or more systems. Power units CAN be made more reliable and robust but at the expense of weight and complexity. More heat generated means less ability for various coolers to maintain ideal operating temperatures without making them larger. Efficient aero demands that the complete power unit be as compact as the rules allow. The simpler way to ensure reliability is to run at a slightly lower level of performance.
Regarding the post-race 5-second penalty for Leclerc: Why do the stewards firstly say that there is no investigation necessary, only to later on in the race state that they will look at it post-race? And then ultimately do give the penalty? I mean: asking the teams (in this case Ferrari and RB) to come to the stewards office and explain themselves, while obviously being extremely biased towards their own team, how will this biased information given by the teams help with making a decision rather than looking at all the data and onboards the stewards have access to?
Usually first lap incidents are considered part of the game, but after an appeal and reviews of the incident it was clear that this incident was 100% avoidable. I won't say Leclerc intended on actually colliding with Verstappen but he cleary had no intention on creating more racing space either. Even if he didn't make contact with Verstappen, Verstappen would have been forced off the track either way cause Leclerc let his car run wide to the edge of the track.
@@lunasilvermoon2283 Yes i understand the leniancy towards first lap incidents, and that this was a avoidable collision, and therefore a penalty. However what i dont understand is why it has to take so long and why the teams need to report to the stewards. I dont believe that the teams can give more information than is already available to the stewards.
@@DJMayjority Well, if RBR wouldn't have reported it and appealed for them to take a closer look at it, they would have done it away as a first lap racing incident. The teams don't have more information but they can appeal to the stewards to have a closer look at them because there is a lot of money involved in this.
Formula 1 "needs" change because top 3 teams can spend almost limitless amount of money and practically buy championships. Mercedes, Read Bull and Ferrari have won all races from 2nd race in 2014 championship till now. Mercedes won 73,5% V6 turbo era races, RB 12,8%, Ferrari 13,7%. Top 3 teams have won over 94% of all podiums since V6 turbo era (333 : 21). It would be a little less "annoying" if they had balls to employ 6 best drivers on the grid (Bottas and Albon).
I don't think Albon is bad though. Looks pretty talented putting in solid results race after race since his promotion. Also he seems to be closing the gap to Verstappen. Now Bottas has showed to be not much more then a wingmen with a solid drive here and there (like last week) Gasly was worse.....much worse.
Your analogy with a false start in athletics is wrong. It's nothing to do with crossing the startline. The false start is measured by a pressure sensor on the starting blocks relative to the firing of the starting gun if there is any change within the minimum reaction time it is deemed a false start. This clearly does not allow the competitor any opportunity to correct their error. Sebastion Vettel should have been penalised. However, there is a perception in F1 that we can not do without Ferrari and therefore they can do no wrong.
I believe that the DRS should be only manual/up to the Pilots and be used during the entire race (P1 TOO)If the driver misses,he"ll be in the gravel.....and thee Tire makers to choose from.
would be possibly deadly if they decide to use it asa weapon....your idea is dangerous and stupid, it would allow a leading car to mess with the air and therefore the downforce of the car to their rear.
It was a jump start and Charles should have had an 5-10 second penalty in race, Ferrari International Assistance at its best. As for Athletics, a jump start is recorded for just moving on your blocks, if you even just wobble you will be given a jump start. I understand that a judder from mechanical parts engaging is expected, but Vettel clearly move before the lights went out.
I have two suggestions, what do you think of them? (1) Regarding your suggestion of restricting the time available for teams, perhaps one of the practice sessions could be limited for teams depending on their position in the championship, i.e. only the last placed team can start at the beginning of the session, then each team can start in ascending order of position every 5 minutes. This would reduce the leading team's testing time by 45 minutes. (2) In particular if the FIA were to move to a 2-day weekend, perhaps it would be a good idea to add an extra half-hour of practice time for rookies, i.e. any driver that has never raced in F1 at that circuit before. This would help the rookie drivers, and also give them an extra opportunity for some media coverage / publicity.
Wouldn't a preset distance be a poor way of achieving this as it would vary from lap to lap? If you go around the outside of a car or take non-standard lines - over the course of a race, the corner mappings would be out of whack. Unless they had a mechanism to reset the distance from lap to lap.
Question, potentially, about the Renault brake balance system. Could it be legal if the balance settings were recorded by the driver during practise/qualifying? Re Vettel's jump: There was another Valtteri start, last year I think, which was discussed at the time and he either didn't jump and made an amazing getaway or managed to get away with it.
I think that argument would be pushing it, but it's the kind of boundary pushing that does happen... There was always a minimum time after the lights went out, that was deemed to be quicker than human reactions can ever be, so I think that was maybe the question on that one with Valtteri.
re: jump starts in athletics If the IAAF rules were applied, not only would Seb have been penalized for his jump start, but Valtteri would have been penalized, too, because he moved too quickly after the signal was given. (0,05sec according to Auto Motor und Sport) to actually be reacting to anything. In other words, Valtteri got lucky again, like in Austria 2017, with guessing when the red lights would go out and winning the race as a consequence.
There's a good chance Valtteri was reacting to Vettel's move. Seeing an opponent take off can often induce others to do the same, even without consciously intending to or being aware of it. That's why you see a lot of false starts in athletics where multiple people are off the blocks early.
Marc great show every time. Shouldn't DRS be working through 130R. Then the curve will be a challenge again like in the old days. At least the next coming years. And Leclerc could not drive it one handed...
This incident show that the sensors and/or tolerance level is too big because its visually a start (and by the rules definition cos you're not allowed to move in the box) but not on the sensor. Also given that it just so happened that the checkered flag signal went one lap too early, the electronics systems used by the FIA is not giving me much confidence. I'm not one of those people who calls FIA out on every single penalty decision given, and understand that it is not as easy as it looks but the officiating and handling of some of the rules in the Japanese 2019 GP is ludicrous. I hope they take actions to improve the system after this.
I saw a couple of weeks ago at the world's athletic championships get McNeil disqualified for something similar. Her feet were on the blocks at the gun but without 'enough' pressure. It was my impression that the judges decided to stand by their decision based on the video's review (she obviously moved way before the start). Just a note on your reference to athletics
DRS open through 130R would also not only be stupidly fast/dangerous but the only teams that could possibly do it would be teams that have high mechanical downforce on their cars (Marcedes, Redbull, and possibly Ferrari). The teams mainly at the back don't have the downforce meaning that the "top" teams would have more of an advantage. If Renault has got a system that enables them to do brake-bias by race distance in some sort of mapping, I would like to shake the hand of the man or woman that designed that, as truthfully that is an absolutely genius idea. Ok, it breaks the rules but HATS OFF TO YOU.
Ignoring the time penalty for the collision. I do agree if Leclerc ignored the instruction to pit, then that penalty is justified. I'd hate to imagine if the end plate had hit Lewis what damage or injury it might have caused...
Hi Elvis, check onboard footage of turn 1 (2) incident, a lot of experts are of the opinion Charles did steer into Max (so more deliberate than understeer). Since Austria his driving is more assertive, but he should not need this much with his huge talent, he is now hurting himself.
I agree with a bit of first lap leniency, but I must say in this case it does look like Charles opened up the steering a bit to squeeze Max out. You could almost see his thought-process in those few split seconds....bad start, desperate to make it up, wait, is that Verstappen going around the outside? and he started behind me? ..there's no way I'm letting him by....squeeze...whoopsie....oh he's off....ah well, the stewards will think it was understeer, let's push on
Marc About the mapping now what is not legal. What is the difference with alonso talking pouhon flat out what Made his mapping “confused”. Now an advantage maybe on that time a disadvantage
Hi Mark! I just want to say thank you for all your content, your enthusiasm and your contribution to our sport. When I first watched F1 I was a little boy. But I stopped for a long time. Your videos help rekindle my spark of passion for F1. I'm now a young lad at the end of College and my dream is to work in an F1 team. Probably a marketing/relation position. Your stack of rejection letters really inspires me that I can do it if I try hard enough. Again, thank you so much for your passion for F1 and for inspiring my dream.
Hi Marc, huge fan of your work. Was thinking about Vettel's pôle lap and I remember him saying thé wind really helped keep thé rear of thé car stable through thé Esses , so much so that hé didnt brake until thé 2nd of thé Degners. Do you think hé Can guide next year's design to pile on rear downforce ? Should that bé thé case, we would bé Silly to write him off. But, it is also crazy to think one of thé great drivers of this era has such a narrow Peak performance Window!
Appreciate what you're saying about tyre blankets. But think you missed that I believe there was an element of unpredictability that F1 wanted to add. Drivers and Pirelli however were against on grounds of safety. Cost was right at the bottom of the list.
Regarding Vettles start, I'm completely OK with it because of precedence. The jump start not being a jump start because it didn't trigger the sensor has happened in the past. This has happened on a few different occasions while I've been watching F1 (since Monaco 1997) so I wasn't surprised at all that the FIA said no action despite clear movement. I have to say however, I'm kind of a black and white guy when it comes to the sporting rules, if there is consistency and precedent I'm onboard with the tolerance, but I'd prefer the rules followed and enforced overall.
Do you think that Renault would have gotten away with the automatic brake bias system in the 2014-16 era when the FIA tries to simplify the cockpit controls, with the excuse of simplifying the cockpit operations for the drivers
Even if Charles was given the time penalty early in the race, they could opt to serve it during a pitstop or after the race (like Max in Monaco), so it doesn't really matter?
think it's a huge difference the earlier the better , Leclerc might not have pitted near the end of the race IF he had a known time penalty was imminent
There is a youtube video of Riccardo's race at Japan in F1 chanel maybe you might be able to see of he was using the preset braking it has his steering wheel in plain sight go look there
With athletics as the example you gave for false starts, they use the rule that any movement before the gun and the speed of a human reaction, say 0.073 of a second, is deemed as a false start, ie anything before (the gun + the speed of a human reaction) = false start.
It's the medical car, ready to be on the scene as accidents are more prevalent at the race start. They don't normally do the full lap, but pull off onto an exit road and back to the pits, depending on the track.
Do you actually think a distance dependent system could be used for corner specific settings? Wouldn't moving off the race line, pitting and teaching incidents unpredictably change the distance traveled?
@@F1Elvis Yeah ok, Im starting to see that it's possible... I had expected, and probably still lean towards, that it could be a subtle change over the course of the race that offset the weight distribution caused by reduction in fuel weight or some other factors rather than drastic changes for each corner.
27:40 A good example on what could happen in 130R then just look at what happend to Marcus Eriksson in Monza 2018 when he´s DRS failed and dident close during braking. Ofc u would not brake in 130R but with very low downforce on the rear and potentialy very low downforce over the front wing while in the slipstream of the car ahead. Combine that with an aggresive directional change in a corner during very high speed during the overtake attempt and u could have a very dangerous situation. So it´s probadly for the best that that staight before 130R dont have a DRS zone.
The racing has been good since France because the tracks since France have been good racing tracks (minus Singapore and Russia). The first 8 races, unless weather or safety cars are involved, are tracks that are really difficult to overtake. If F1 really wanted to make the racing better they would also be looking to faze out the races that promote boring races. Changes to the cars (2021 regs if they happen) should help in places like China, Bahrain, Canada, Singapore, Mexico and Brazil but they are not going to change Australia, Baku, Monaco, Spain, France and Russia. I would really like F1 to do a rolling calendar for 6-7 of the races to mix things up, visit different places and remove tracks that prove to be boring races.
A Question Marc, when the drivers are being questioned in the corral there is always a team member with a recorder with them, what is their function? are they spies? are there fines for talking out of turn? Love your show.
I personally think it was a jump start but to say "all sports .... blah blah blah" is just not true. very few racing sports actually have a static start at all, the only 0 moment before the start rule are from short distance foot racing.
I don't get the penalties for false starts when the driver ends up loosing time and positions because of it... I would only penalize false starts if the driver gains something or endanger others.
I think you could have explained the ers mapping a bit better. Espacially considering that max had massive Problems in qualy with his. even so much that they had to reprogramm it mid qualy
