| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One 13:42 - Nov 23 with 785 views | Plums |
I've just had a debate about the outcome of the Las Vegas GP with both my kids who are F1 fans. As someone who invests emotionally in sport, I find it completely unacceptable that a technical infringement after the race has finished, changes the result and context of what's just taken place.
It was bad enough watching the replay only to find the McLarens have been disqualified after the event. If I'd paid thousands to travel and watch, I'd feel robbed.
Both kids are fine with it and say the sport has no problem. My position is the FIA has to do better with the technology at its disposal to make these calls whilst the cars are on track. For fans who are totally into the the rules, regs etc, maybe it is OK. For those who are marginal or are casual observers, I think it's something that just makes little sense.
I'm interested to understand where others stand.
I expect replies about F1 not being a sport etc. but I suspect the reason Leicester and Man City haven't yet been punished for their misdemeanours is (nearly) as much about changing sporting outcomes after the event as it is about being scared of expensive lawsuits.
|  |
| |  |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 13:48 - Nov 23 with 748 views | Zx1988 |
I understand the broader reasoning for the punishment, but it's rather opaque as to what (if any) advantage has been gained by the McLarens as a result of, allegedly, having a slightly lower ride height.
The punishment seems to be consistent with previous incidents, so it all seems above board, but I'm sure the FIA are also rather happy that it could result in a three-way title race going into Abu Dhabi. |  |
| |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:17 - Nov 23 with 601 views | stonojnr |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 13:48 - Nov 23 by Zx1988 |
I understand the broader reasoning for the punishment, but it's rather opaque as to what (if any) advantage has been gained by the McLarens as a result of, allegedly, having a slightly lower ride height.
The punishment seems to be consistent with previous incidents, so it all seems above board, but I'm sure the FIA are also rather happy that it could result in a three-way title race going into Abu Dhabi. |
basically the advantage is it means your car is quicker, which in a race is the performance is a significant factor in result.
essentially in the ground effect era the closer you can get your car to run nearer the tarmac, the better aerodynamic effect of it essentially sucking the car to the ground becomes,which means you can them trim your wings to decrease drag, and then go faster in a straight line
take Ferrari as one of those teams who havent cracked this aspect yet, so they have to run with a higher ride height, which is why their performance generally sucks in races in comparison.
in Brazil at the last race the FIA stewards found some teams had been exploiting an area in the rules, some say even against the rules, and were using heat-expanding titanium skid plates to protect against plank wear, allowing them to run the cars with a lower ride height, those teams were not named
but these type of skid plates were banned from this race...you can draw your own conclusions about what these two separate pieces of info mean. | | | |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:22 - Nov 23 with 587 views | stonojnr |
well you cant measure plank wear till after the result, its essentially a post race check that can only happen post race, and the results in all forms of motorsport are subject to such post race scrutineering.
some of them take much longer to check than in F1, like there was an example at Le Mans recently where a team won their class, did the podium, partied and celebrated all night no doubt. Woke up the next morning and found theyd been disqualified. The Ferrari that finished 4th this year, again disqualified a day later, and took nearly 2-3 days to confirm the results.
if you feel robbed, blame the team for not ensuring their cars followed the rules. | | | |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:23 - Nov 23 with 585 views | Trequartista |
If i could thumb this up twice I would. |  |
| |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:27 - Nov 23 with 571 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
Punishing Leicester and Man City for cheating (that's what this is about in both cases - whether deliberately breaking the rules or carelessly doing so through mismanagement), would be a future punishment and not taking away titles/trophies/etc already won (although I think the Scottish FA might have done that to Rangers, I am not aware of any suggestion it will be done in these cases). |  |
| |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:38 - Nov 23 with 545 views | Plums |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:22 - Nov 23 by stonojnr |
well you cant measure plank wear till after the result, its essentially a post race check that can only happen post race, and the results in all forms of motorsport are subject to such post race scrutineering.
some of them take much longer to check than in F1, like there was an example at Le Mans recently where a team won their class, did the podium, partied and celebrated all night no doubt. Woke up the next morning and found theyd been disqualified. The Ferrari that finished 4th this year, again disqualified a day later, and took nearly 2-3 days to confirm the results.
if you feel robbed, blame the team for not ensuring their cars followed the rules. |
Thanks, that's a terrible situation re the Le Mans race and again brings into question the essence of sport for me.
That, the Vegas and other F1 examples this season are the equivalent of the VAR pause between a 'goal', the emotional celebration and then waiting to see if it stands - on steroids.
Perhaps I'm just old fashioned in wanting to see competition play out. | |
| |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:41 - Nov 23 with 534 views | Zx1988 |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:17 - Nov 23 by stonojnr |
basically the advantage is it means your car is quicker, which in a race is the performance is a significant factor in result.
essentially in the ground effect era the closer you can get your car to run nearer the tarmac, the better aerodynamic effect of it essentially sucking the car to the ground becomes,which means you can them trim your wings to decrease drag, and then go faster in a straight line
take Ferrari as one of those teams who havent cracked this aspect yet, so they have to run with a higher ride height, which is why their performance generally sucks in races in comparison.
in Brazil at the last race the FIA stewards found some teams had been exploiting an area in the rules, some say even against the rules, and were using heat-expanding titanium skid plates to protect against plank wear, allowing them to run the cars with a lower ride height, those teams were not named
but these type of skid plates were banned from this race...you can draw your own conclusions about what these two separate pieces of info mean. |
Is there any way that the plank could be made of a material that's much harder to degrade?
Notwithstanding the validity of McLaren's arguments about porpoising (and I did note during one period of on-board footage that it looked like a very bouncy ride), surely it would make sense for a device such as that to do as much as possible to prevent an illegal ride height, rather than be able to degrade to such a point that an advantage can be gained? | |
| |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 16:39 - Nov 23 with 475 views | stonojnr |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:41 - Nov 23 by Zx1988 |
Is there any way that the plank could be made of a material that's much harder to degrade?
Notwithstanding the validity of McLaren's arguments about porpoising (and I did note during one period of on-board footage that it looked like a very bouncy ride), surely it would make sense for a device such as that to do as much as possible to prevent an illegal ride height, rather than be able to degrade to such a point that an advantage can be gained? |
well its designed to wear, because thats the simplest way of proving the cars ride height was then set too low and its impossible to really set a single minimum ride height as its a very complex interaction between the car setup and the track. even just the way its raced, like I believe Ferrari are forced to lift and coast more when the car is full of fuel so that the pitch and roll is lessened so their plank wears less, theres also suggestion that having more access to DRS during a race helps with wear too as your running with less downforce at times, and yes some teams bank on that in their calculations.
but it was brought in with the safety changes post Senna's crash,so its been around for 30+ years, because it was felt cars were then running dangerously close to the ground, they were all essentially flat bottomed then, and one of the theories was Senna's car grounded out over the bumps on the track at Imola and lost the ability to steer the car through the corner.
so the plank was designed to increase the ride height of the cars to stop that happening again and if the car still hits the ground the plank wears.
but there is and always has been performance advantages to trying to get your car closer to the ground so teams are constantly trying to push their cars closer to the limit of legal wear.
whilst its still accepted there is some wear regardless, if you hit the old fashioned kerbs alot, or if you spin off track, get a puncture, and yes porpoising is absolutely a valid cause of higher than anticipated wear.
but the porpoising is linked to the ride height :D
because its an aero effect when the ground effect of the floor essentially stalls, all of that downforce the floor was creating is released off the car and it pitches up, which allows the floor to start doing its downforce thing again so the car pitches down and it becomes cyclic hence the bouncy ride.
now ride height isnt the whole solution to fixing porpoising as geometry of suspension and dampers can be tuned to mitigate it as well as changing downforce on the wings
but McLaren clearly didnt arrive at a solution setup for Vegas, despite having had a very workable setup for the previous 20+ races, and it could be the curse of the sprint race format as theres not enough race simulation time being done, and yes some teams will have had a different sprint setup, ie more aggressive on ride height and one that wouldnt have worked for the full race in terms of plank wear.
but ultimately everyone else in the top 3 did their sums correctly, McLaren didnt, hence the dsq. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 16:45 - Nov 23 with 446 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 16:39 - Nov 23 by stonojnr |
well its designed to wear, because thats the simplest way of proving the cars ride height was then set too low and its impossible to really set a single minimum ride height as its a very complex interaction between the car setup and the track. even just the way its raced, like I believe Ferrari are forced to lift and coast more when the car is full of fuel so that the pitch and roll is lessened so their plank wears less, theres also suggestion that having more access to DRS during a race helps with wear too as your running with less downforce at times, and yes some teams bank on that in their calculations.
but it was brought in with the safety changes post Senna's crash,so its been around for 30+ years, because it was felt cars were then running dangerously close to the ground, they were all essentially flat bottomed then, and one of the theories was Senna's car grounded out over the bumps on the track at Imola and lost the ability to steer the car through the corner.
so the plank was designed to increase the ride height of the cars to stop that happening again and if the car still hits the ground the plank wears.
but there is and always has been performance advantages to trying to get your car closer to the ground so teams are constantly trying to push their cars closer to the limit of legal wear.
whilst its still accepted there is some wear regardless, if you hit the old fashioned kerbs alot, or if you spin off track, get a puncture, and yes porpoising is absolutely a valid cause of higher than anticipated wear.
but the porpoising is linked to the ride height :D
because its an aero effect when the ground effect of the floor essentially stalls, all of that downforce the floor was creating is released off the car and it pitches up, which allows the floor to start doing its downforce thing again so the car pitches down and it becomes cyclic hence the bouncy ride.
now ride height isnt the whole solution to fixing porpoising as geometry of suspension and dampers can be tuned to mitigate it as well as changing downforce on the wings
but McLaren clearly didnt arrive at a solution setup for Vegas, despite having had a very workable setup for the previous 20+ races, and it could be the curse of the sprint race format as theres not enough race simulation time being done, and yes some teams will have had a different sprint setup, ie more aggressive on ride height and one that wouldnt have worked for the full race in terms of plank wear.
but ultimately everyone else in the top 3 did their sums correctly, McLaren didnt, hence the dsq. |
It is the nature of the sport that technical specifications are checked at the end of the race. Similarly car weight, etc. It is the same with other individual sports where drugs tests are carried out and anyone failing them is later disqualified. It is the nature of applying the rules and I can't see a problem with it (or a better alternative) really. | |
| |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 16:50 - Nov 23 with 440 views | stonojnr |
| The essence of sport - exhibit no.1 Formula One on 15:38 - Nov 23 by Plums |
Thanks, that's a terrible situation re the Le Mans race and again brings into question the essence of sport for me.
That, the Vegas and other F1 examples this season are the equivalent of the VAR pause between a 'goal', the emotional celebration and then waiting to see if it stands - on steroids.
Perhaps I'm just old fashioned in wanting to see competition play out. |
well its bad in the Le Mans example, as the team who ultimately won the class, didnt get to celebrate the win on the podium, and another team who then make the top 3 didnt get to take part at all.
it doesnt happen like that often, fortunately and whilst it takes away some of the celebration as a fan, theres just no way you can check all the cars properly that quickly, so its kind of accepted thats just the way it is.
at least in F1 theyve managed to get alot better at it, there were times when youd find out the result changed hours later, or the teams were arguing with the stewards about it late into the night.
there was one plank wear dsq back in its early days, where the results of one race werent confirmed till a week later, because that was when the appeal against the dsq was heard. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
