Should DRS be removed from Formula 1?

Article Discussion
Should DRS go_.jpg

What are your thoughts on DRS?

  • Total voters
    801
With two races out of the way, we have experienced the new 2022 regulations and how the cars race. Should the Drag Reduction System (DRS) be removed from Formula 1 or be kept?

The 2022 regulations were a massive overhaul of the car regulations. The 2022 regulations which were originally slated for 2021 but were delayed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and have one major principle to allow cars to race closer.

With previous regulations, a following car would lose 35% of their downforce when racing within 20 metres of the car ahead. That loss of downforce could increase to 47% if the following car got within 10 metres of the car ahead.

The new regulations are meant to reduce the downforce lost and from what we have seen so far, the new regulations appear to work.

So now that we know cars are able to drive closer to each other, should we remove DRS?

Drag Reduction System (DRS) was introduced to F1 in 2011. DRS was implemented as a tool to allow cars to overtake. It is essentially an adjustable rear wing that is operated by the driver. DRS has strict conditions where the racing conditions must be safe and the pursuing car must be within a one second gap of the car in front as it crosses the DRS detection zone.

When it was introduced, it was met with a mixed reaction. Some thought it to be the solution to a lack of overtaking, whilst others thought it made overtaking too easy. Now that we appear to have cars that can drive closer to each other, surely this makes overtaking even easier?

Bahrain 2022​

During the first race of the season, we saw Charles Leclerc and Max Verstappen battling for the lead - before Max had to retire. During this race we appeared to see the immense advantage Max had over Charles along the start/finish straight. At times, Max was just within the one second gap that is required to activate DRS, yet was able to get to T1 first. However, DRS wasn’t quite as powerful as it first appeared here. After the race Charles Leclerc stated that he allowed Max to close the gap along the start/finish straight, so that he had DRS immediately after - which allowed him to hold onto the lead.

Bahrain DRS.jpg


Saudi Arabia 2022​

The second race of the season was at Jeddah and this is where we say a very peculiar thing indeed. Whilst battling for the lead, we saw Charles and Max both hit the brakes hard before entering the DRS detection zone for the start/finish straight. It would appear that whoever entered the final corner first would be at a massive disadvantage and could be easily overtaken. So the result saw both drivers braking heavily, trying to be the second car to enter the final corner. But, this race was more than just the DRS zones, it showed how well these cars can follow each other. Both the Ferrari and Red Bull were able to follow each other closely through most of the lap, which was not so easy in 2021 with the previous F1 regulations.

Jeddah DRS.jpg


Calls for a change to DRS​

Many fans have started to call for a change to the DRS rules and those calls for a change could be amplified further with this week’s race at Albert Park. The Australian GP has an unprecedented 4 DRS zones, one along the main straight, another between turns 2 and 3, the third between turns 8 and 9, and the fourth between turns 10 and 11.

Australia DRS.jpg


Here are our thoughts on some potential options for 2022.

Remove DRS completely. If DRS were to be removed completely, then there will be one certainty - less overtaking. DRS is there to help overtaking, so completely removing it will have an impact on the amount of overtakes that are seen during a race. Also, removing DRS will expose how well the F1 2022 regulation cars actually follow each other. There is also the cost to take into account as each team has a budget cap.

If DRS were to be removed, the rear wings may have to keep the DRS function for the remainder of the season. It also may not be as simple as removing the adjustable flap, as these wings will most definitely have been designed to optimise DRS in some way and so may need a complete redesign.
  • Pros - Real overtaking
  • Cons - Less overtaking and potential cost implication
Restrict the use of DRS. The main disadvantage of DRS is that it gives the driver behind an advantage over the driver ahead. However, this could be eradicated if the DRS detection zones were removed and drivers were allowed to use DRS whenever they liked - still with designated DRS zones. This would provide the driver ahead to have a way to defend from an overtaking car. It could also be used by drivers who are attempting to complete an over or undercut, by using DRS to put in a fast lap whilst other drivers are pitting.

The caveat to this is that there would be a limited number of times any one driver could activate DRS during a race.
  • Pros - allows driver ahead to defend and tactical use of DRS
  • Cons - still doesn’t address DRS being potentially overpowered
Leave it as it is. Whilst we are only two races into the season, removing DRS or changing the way it is utilised could be potentially unfair. There were 77 overtakes in Bahrain and 33 overtakes in Saudi Arabia - the majority of these overtakes would have been with the aid of DRS. This means that DRS is already a factor to the amount of points certain drivers have been rewarded and this includes Max Verstappen who may not have won the race at Jeddah without DRS.

Love it or hate it, DRS does provide more opportunities to overtake and without DRS there will be less overtaking. Less overtaking could have an impact on the global audience, especially affecting the audience who have only known F1 with DRS. A result of this could mean an impact on F1 financially - with less fans watching F1 and fewer companies willing to invest in the motorsport.

Finally, leaving DRS as it is allows the FIA to evaluate the entire season and to properly formulate a plan for 2023, if they chose to change DRS in some way in the future.

What are your thoughts about DRS? Should we keep it, change it, or leave it?
  • Like
Reactions: Deena Gold, lpaulocp, Omer Said and 4 others
About author
Damian Reed
Damian Reed
PC geek, gamer, content creator, and passionate sim racer.
I live life a 1/4 mile at a time, it takes me ages to get anywhere!

More in F1 & Motorsport

Comments

Ben Lee
Remove it, it has no place in what is supposed to be the "pinnacle of motorsport".

I also feel they have missed a trick when it comes to the cars being able to follow closer.

I noticed early on that the FIA has mandated that the front wings be higher for 2022, I have assumed this has been done to try and maximise airflow to the floor area. However having a higher front wing then exposes that wing to more turbulent air. I think the rule makers have short memories because when they raised front wing heights in 2001 and then again in 2005, the comments from drivers were that it was even harder to follow another car due to the front wing being in more disturbed air. If the front wing was right on the ground then it would be in a ground effect scenario and have less disturbance. To me they have prioritised outright downforce generation in spite of cars being able to follow.
 
PickledAvenger
Surely there is a happy medium for now. On inside 1 sec, turn off when within .2 sec. Don't we all just want to stop the drive by when the driver behind got a poorer exit from the preceding corner
 
Jim Layee
The Don't Race System is just silly.
I know a few people prefer faked overtakes to none at all , but that too is silly

If DRS was a thing when you started watching then it will seem normal , this too is silly.

Not voting to get rid , that's silly too .

If you want over takes go watch Oval racing where there is plenty, this is not silly.
 
Richard Wilks
JohannesK said:
What are you talking about lmao
Click to expand...
A piece of advice, if you don't know what you are talking about, don't talk about it.

But since this gets thrown around a lot, let me elaborate:

A 2020 F1 had an estimated 6500lbs of downforce at 300Kph. Now this is a lot of course, but we are talking about a car that weights 750kgs. It is estimated that at least 10% or more of this was lost last year with the rule changes, and hasnt been clawed back since.

A 1980 F1 had around 5500lbs at the same speed. And sure, this is maybe a litle bit less in absolute terms, but this car weighted 500 kgs, and was considerably shorter, and overall efficiency (L/D) was the same, or even better than current cars.

For comparison sake, the Toyota Eagle mkIII GTP car from 1992 could reach 7500lbs of downforce, with MORE efficiency, in a car that weighted as much as a modern F1 car.

Also, even after ground effects were banned in F1, the downforce was clawed back by bolting massive wings, and using the massive power of the turbo engines to overcome the drag.
 
Last edited:
Jim Layee
Bram Hengeveld said:
The solution is not that hard. We had plenty of overtakes in the 80s:
  • Ditch the powersteering, bring back H-pattern shifters with a clutch and good luck racing around the track with one hand like this boss did back in the days. Catch slides, correct massive oversteer and powerslides and show who really masters his vehicle instead of having a jet on rails that we have today.
  • Reduce the wings and ground effect. Focus more on mechanical grip (setup!) than aero.
  • Let drivers decide how far they wish to open the turbo. Need to overtake? Take the risk to blow up your V10 (or v12 obviously, not a V6 vaccuumcleaner powerunitwhatever) engine and crank up that turbo power!
  • Free pitstop strategies
  • Nobody needs hybrid power-units in F1. I understand it's cool for marketing but no real life driver needs it to race on a circuit. For electrical novelties there are plenty of dedicated series already (ETCR, Formula E).
Result: less aero, more mechanical grip, better sounds, more overtakes. And the fans at home and especially those at the track win.

Alternatively if none of the above works. Ditch all the F1 cars and tech and race with the amazing F2 cars instead. Plenty of action there each race.
Click to expand...


It's April the 6th you know.
 
Colt459
These aren’t the same cars from the past. Even with the new changes, drivers and teams have come out and said:

1. There would be no passing without DRS

2. You cannot follow close for more than a few laps before your tires fall apart

You would be back to parade events. Maybe some people prefer that to keep their purity, but it’s not entertaining.
 
Jim Layee
Damage Inc said:
MGP is awesomely close now, makes it impossible to predict and that makes it so much better as a neutral. Who'd have thunk Aprillia would win a race?!!!! The concessions system is brilliant too, the worse you do the more testing and development you are allowed to do, F1 should definitely follow that system IMO. Reminds me of the "draft" system in the NFL. Do crap and you get the early picks of the best college players....Bengals went from barely winning for two years then the into the Superbowl and only "just" lost.
Click to expand...

Pay attention at the back, it's already happening with aero development
 
MoerasGrizzly
Premium
Richard Wilks said:
I get tired of hearing these sort of arguments.


Tell me, at Saudi Arabia, where did the rest of the field finish apart from the first 2? Can you even remember?

You do realize that more overtakes is not equal to a better race, or championship. If that was the case, F1 would have closed shop a long time ago, and we would be watching Oval plate racing only.

Nobody cares about field spread, if the same guys are always winning, Which has been the case for F1 for the past 10 year, DRS or no DRS. Mazepin finishing 1 lap, or 4 laps behind is totally irrelevant.

1984 was also a year dominated by one team. Hardly the best example of the 80s. Why you dont compare it with 1982 for example?...
Click to expand...
I could easily turn that around on the 80s though: The "Same guys always winning" was also a running theme. The most famous F1 battle in history is arguably between Senna and Prost, and those guys were on the same team! I picked 1984 more or less at random, because of the George Orwell book title more then anything, and I didn't really think about how one team was very dominant in that one. You have a fair point about 1982, but that season also doesn't fit Bram's requirements: Turbo engines were very rare, and ground effect was still in play. A lot of the things that Bram talks about that according to him made 80s racing great happened from '83 onwards.

I'd also highlight some issues with 1982 that I think are worth talking about: Keke Rosberg won 1982 not by virtue of winning races (Since notably, he won one race) but by virtue of, well, not being involved in any accidents. Strong competitors either suffered from breaking cars, breaking legs, or breaking necks.

I'll grant that it deserves its reputation of being competetive at least, but looking at 1982 specifically would be cherrypicking in the same way that someone arguing for more modern F1 would pick 2008 or 2012 as examples for "seasons of the decade" whilst ignoring that those decades too had long periods where one team dominated.

The only thing that, in my mind, has meaningfully changed between post-millenium F1 and pre-millenium F1 is that pre-millenium F1 still had times were a driver's career got cut short by that driver being killed or severely injured on track. I personally do not think that's a point in favour of older F1.

I do actually remember from the top of my head where people finished in Jeddah apart from the first two, as Sergio Perez and Carlos Sainz both had a good shot at winning the race from the word go. Estaban Ocon and Fernando Alonso were highly competetive and fighting eachother throughout. It's true: I don't exactly remember everything that happened, but that's in part becuase a lot of things happened. Something like 1989 or 2021 is easy to remember, becuase either Prost or Senna won, or either Hamilton or Verstappen won. I'd have a lot harder time remembering the results of something like 2012 or the entirety of Formula E at this point (2012 having had 8 race winners throughout the season, and Formula E having had several consecutive seasons where there was a different winner for each race).
 
Last edited:
Aki Korhonen
DirkW said:
Probably: keep it, simply for the entertainment factor of more overtaking.
Click to expand...
its not so entertaining when overtaking only straight sections. or that they play games who is first when the straight starts. drs should be on all track sections but it can be only activated like 20 seconds or so. but if we want close racing remove wings :D
 
Aki Korhonen
we have to remember that modern f1 drivers are mostly young boys so they don't even know how they competed back in the days. example villeneuve vs arnoux in paul ricard. i hate modern world :) f1 cars should be smaller.
 
Damage Inc
Colt459 said:
These aren’t the same cars from the past. Even with the new changes, drivers and teams have come out and said:

1. There would be no passing without DRS

2. You cannot follow close for more than a few laps before your tires fall apart

You would be back to parade events. Maybe some people prefer that to keep their purity, but it’s not entertaining.
Click to expand...
Most fans saw the issues of no passing because of Aero grip yonks ago. DRS was a half arsed attempt to correct things...new regs are a MUCH better step in the direction to facilitate more overtaking without a gimmick. To solve the tyre issue the tyres need to be redesigned so that they do NOT fall apart.
 
Richard Wilks
MoerasGrizzly said:
I could easily turn that around on the 80s though: The "Same guys always winning" was also a running theme. The most famous F1 battle in history is arguably between Senna and Prost, and those guys were on the same team! I picked 1984 more or less at random, because of the George Orwell book title more then anything, and I didn't really think about how one team was very dominant in that one. You have a fair point about 1982, but that season also doesn't fit Bram's requirements: Turbo engines were very rare, and ground effect was still in play. A lot of the things that Bram talks about that according to him made 80s racing great happened from '83 onwards.

I'd also highlight some issues with 1982 that I think are worth talking about: Keke Rosberg won 1982 not by virtue of winning races (Since notably, he won one race) but by virtue of, well, not being involved in any accidents. Strong competitors either suffered from breaking cars, breaking legs, or breaking necks.

I'll grant that it deserves its reputation of being competetive at least, but looking at 1982 specifically would be cherrypicking in the same way that someone arguing for more modern F1 would pick 2008 or 2012 as examples for "seasons of the decade" whilst ignoring that those decades too had long periods where one team dominated.

The only thing that, in my mind, has meaningfully changed between post-millenium F1 and pre-millenium F1 is that pre-millenium F1 still had times were a driver's career got cut short by that driver being killed or severely injured on track. I personally do not think that's a point in favour of older F1.

I do actually remember from the top of my head where people finished in Jeddah apart from the first two, as Sergio Perez and Carlos Sainz both had a good shot at winning the race from the word go. Estaban Ocon and Fernando Alonso were highly competetive and fighting eachother throughout. It's true: I don't exactly remember everything that happened, but that's in part becuase a lot of things happened. Something like 1989 or 2021 is easy to remember, becuase either Prost or Senna won, or either Hamilton or Verstappen won. I'd have a lot harder time remembering the results of something like 2012 or the entirety of Formula E at this point (2012 having had 8 race winners throughout the season, and Formula E having had several consecutive seasons where there was a different winner for each race).
Click to expand...
Well i read all that, and i fail to see the point you were trying to make.

First, i never said that Bram's requirements or "wishlist" was my own.

Second, if you are trying to make a case for competitiveness of the 80s vs "modern" F1 (i think the case here is about DRS era F1, so 2011 and beyond), then its a very poor case, because the last decade was maybe the worst ever of a Winner being a foregone conclusion. You had 2012, and 2016 (intra team rivalry), and now 2021. Besides that, Ferrari did good in two years, but despite that, only 3 teams were in the running for wins for 10 years, rendering the fact the rest of the field is closer in terms of laptimes completely irrelevant.

Which brings me neatly to what i already said. Many overtakes and a closer field laptime wise don't mean exciting races or seasons.

So going back to the 80s, We had 1981, 1982 1983, 1984, 1986 all decided in the last race. And various others decided in the penultimate race. We had multiple winners, and yes, even if there were years later in the decade when Senna, Prost, Mansell or Piquet were doing most of the winning, it was still a toss between any of them. And i will place the reduction of winning teams/drivers on the engine manufacturers getting involved, because in the DFV days, smaller teams had a bigger chance. A problem that only got WORSE since then.
 
mantasisg
Damage Inc said:
Boomers, died in their droves racing, and then didn't want future generations to suffer as they did.
Click to expand...
Boomers were responsible for themselves. But they kept responsibility and control of following generations. There is a difference of safety and having joy of life, organic natural flow of it being taken away in the name of safety.

Sure, having super strong monocoque chassis, halo devices, roll cages, hans devices, modern racing suits, shoes, helmets, gloves, rain tires (ironically so good they can't possibly race in rain anymore due to insane spray) and so on.... that is safety. But there are lots of details that does bring minimal safety or none (maybe making laptimes 0.5s quicker), while taking away spirit of the sport.

In my personal opinion motorsport went for unnecessarily strict measures to provide safety. It is still unnecessarily fast and expensive. Ruined racetracks - also not cheaply. Still has huge voids of safety, some of which comes from drivers themselves being careless due to abusing high safety.
 
MoerasGrizzly
Premium
Richard Wilks said:
First, i never said that Bram's requirements or "wishlist" was my own.
Click to expand...
I know, but I was replying to Bram initially, so my arguments were based around what Bram said rather then a more general point wrt 80s F1. It's why I didn't pick 1982.
Richard Wilks said:
Second, if you are trying to make a case for competitiveness of the 80s vs "modern" F1 (i think the case here is about DRS era F1, so 2011 and beyond), then its a very poor case, because the last decade was maybe the worst ever of a Winner being a foregone conclusion. You had 2012, and 2016 (intra team rivalry), and now 2021. Besides that, Ferrari did good in two years, but despite that, only 3 teams were in the running for wins for 10 years, rendering the fact the rest of the field is closer in terms of laptimes completely irrelevant.

Which brings me neatly to what i already said. Many overtakes and a closer field laptime wise don't mean exciting races or seasons.

So going back to the 80s, We had 1981, 1982 1983, 1984, 1986 all decided in the last race. And various others decided in the penultimate race. We had multiple winners, and yes, even if there were years later in the decade when Senna, Prost, Mansell or Piquet were doing most of the winning, it was still a toss between any of them. And i will place the reduction of winning teams/drivers on the engine manufacturers getting involved, because in the DFV days, smaller teams had a bigger chance. A problem that only got WORSE since then.
Click to expand...
A few points here:
It's easier to say that a championship was decided in the last race when you have fewer races. It's in part why Mclaren's complete dominance of 1988 was so impressive. It hasn't been matched since.
I'd also argue that the rest of the field being closer in laptimes is relevant, becuase for me at least, F1 is not just about who wins it but also the things that happen up and down the field.
And yes, you could say only 3 teams were in the running for wins for the past decade, but notably the same is also true for the 80s: Mclaren, Ferrari and Williams as opposed to Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull. The 90s atleast had Benetton on top of that pile, and the 2000s only had Renault and Ferrari. I genuinely think that a lot of this here is just rose-tinted glasses.

I think you make a very good point that the winning teams/drivers and the engine manufacturer involvement making things worse. I'd argue that the problem there is not so much the involvement itself, but rather the outcomes of the FISA-FOCA war and Bernie Ecclestone's grip on the sport with the concorde agreements which enabled those engine manufacturers. There's a lot of very questionable decisions that have been made in F1 over the past few decades, and those mostly seemed to have revolved around Ecclestone ensuring that Ecclestone could keep earning money.

That's in part why I'm excited about F1 right now, since from 2017 onwards (which is what I would call "Modern F1") we've seen a lot of changes, a much bigger willingness to experiment, and a sport that has been getting more and more competetive with each year after a decline that I guess started in the 80s.
 
Richard Wilks
MoerasGrizzly said:
I know, but I was replying to Bram initially, so my arguments were based around what Bram said rather then a more general point wrt 80s F1. It's why I didn't pick 1982.

A few points here:
It's easier to say that a championship was decided in the last race when you have fewer races. It's in part why Mclaren's complete dominance of 1988 was so impressive. It hasn't been matched since.
I'd also argue that the rest of the field being closer in laptimes is relevant, becuase for me at least, F1 is not just about who wins it but also the things that happen up and down the field.
And yes, you could say only 3 teams were in the running for wins for the past decade, but notably the same is also true for the 80s: Mclaren, Ferrari and Williams as opposed to Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull. The 90s atleast had Benetton on top of that pile, and the 2000s only had Renault and Ferrari. I genuinely think that a lot of this here is just rose-tinted glasses.

I think you make a very good point that the winning teams/drivers and the engine manufacturer involvement making things worse. I'd argue that the problem there is not so much the involvement itself, but rather the outcomes of the FISA-FOCA war and Bernie Ecclestone's grip on the sport with the concorde agreements which enabled those engine manufacturers. There's a lot of very questionable decisions that have been made in F1 over the past few decades, and those mostly seemed to have revolved around Ecclestone ensuring that Ecclestone could keep earning money.

That's in part why I'm excited about F1 right now, since from 2017 onwards (which is what I would call "Modern F1") we've seen a lot of changes, a much bigger willingness to experiment, and a sport that has been getting more and more competetive with each year after a decline that I guess started in the 80s.
Click to expand...

Well first all of all, i dont need to have rose tinted glasses. With the wonders of the internet, i can just rewatch the races of the 80s and 90s at will. So no, this is not nostalgia, or faded memory. This is 1 to 1 comparison.

There were always fights up and down the field. Always. And if anything, TV producers were actually more willing to show them in he old days, because there werent a million DRS passes all the time to distract you, so we could focus on some interesting duels.

Second, the problem is not the amount of teams fighting for championships. Its the foregone conclusions, that are much more prevalent today, specially because thanks to DRS, a driver cant even properly defend anymore, if he lacks a bit of pace. Also, i remember Lotus and Brabham also being big in wins and championships in the 80s, so no, it wasnt just those 3.

And Lastly, i dont see what Bernie has to do with any of this. F1 was very good in the 80s, in the early 90s, and in the late 2000 too. He was always opposed to the DRS, he always defended stricter rules in the engines. Sure he wanted the manufacurers in, they all do. But I dont see where F1 is more "exciting" since he left. We had 3 sleep inducing seasons, and the last one was an outlier, but still with two guys far in front of everybody, and no, i dont think playing with he format of the sport with "sprint races", and throwing more DRS areas creates any more excitment.

Damage Inc brings motoGP to the argument, and i fully agree with him. MotoGP did all right, cracked down on the expensive electronis development, gave the smaller teams chances to catch up, and more importantly, kept the format the same, and gimmicks out of motoGP. Now they have a cracking racing series that can trace its way back for decades, they have real racing on track, and disputed races with many protagonists.

F1 should do the same, regarding electronics and aero. make it spec, or as close of as possible. The teams dont like it? They can go home.

The cost cap is good, (and guess what, a Mosley/Bernie idea), but i reckon the concessions system of motoGP is better.
 
Last edited:
MoerasGrizzly
Premium
Richard Wilks said:
There were always fights up and down the field. Always. And if anything, TV producers were actually more willing to show them in he old days, because there werent a million DRS passes all the time to distract you, so we could focus on some interesting duels.
Click to expand...
Eh, I'd point back to most cars never even finishing the race. How do you get battles "Up and down the field" when there's no field?

Richard Wilks said:
Also, i remember Lotus and Brabham also being big in wins and championships in the 80s, so no, it wasnt just those 3.
Click to expand...
Not when I look at the constructor's championship winners:
1980: Williams - Ford
1981: Williams - Ford
1982: Ferrari
1983: Ferrari
1984: Mclaren - TAG
1985: Mclaren - TAG
1986: Williams - Honda
1987: Williams - Honda
1988: Mclaren - Honda
1989: Mclaren - Honda
1990: Mclaren - Honda
1991: Mclaren - Honda
1992: Williams - Renault

Lotus last won a constructor's championship in 1978, Brabham last won a championship in 1967. Yes, they scored some individual race wins in the 80s, but so did, say, Mclaren, Alpha Tauri and Racing Point in the last couple years.

WRT Bernie, I point towards how stuff like prize money was handled in F1: The arrangement heavily favoured existing teams. Ferrari got a 70+ million dollar bonus just for being Ferrari, on top of their championship winnings (and notably, that's an amount that's higher then any team gets for winning the championship. If Ferrari blew up all their cars every race and didn't classify in the championship, they' would still have gotten more money then whoever won). It's a rich-get-richer scheme, and whilst Ecclestone and Mosley may have been giving lip service to the notion of cost caps, it's very obvious that in Bernie's actual dealings he couldn't care less. What he cared about is him solidifying his own source of income.

I have to say that I also find it slightly weird that Ecclestone would oppose DRS, since he has previously argued for sprint races, sprinklers, a medal system, a lottery grid system, the 2016 qualifying format and shortcuts in F1 :p. It's notable that a lot of the very unpopular changes in F1 (such as DRS!) popped up in response to declining viewer's figures, but Bernie never once considered that that might be because a lot of the F1 coverage moved to television channels not everyone could watch. Another aspect is the endless array of Tilkedromes that popped up over the years, the inclusion of some outright terrible racetracks like the Sochi autodrome, his opposition to Nico Rosberg winning the championship, stuff like making the Abu Dhabi GP get double points for some reason, whilst excluding classic F1 venues. The saga of Silverstone and Donington in particular was particurarely grueling if you're a fan of either track.

At least Stefano Domichelli is less openly corrupt (at the time of writing). We've seen the re-introduction of Imola, we'll most likely (knock wood) see the removal of DRS next year. Given Ecclestone's media statements since leaving, it's hard to see objectively some objectively good changes like the introduction of the halo and the removal of the Russia GP happen under his watch.
 
Last edited:
Richard Wilks
MoerasGrizzly said:
Eh, I'd point back to most cars never even finishing the race. How do you get battles "Up and down the field" when there's no field?


Not when I look at the constructor's championship winners:
1980: Williams - Ford
1981: Williams - Ford
1982: Ferrari
1983: Ferrari
1984: Mclaren - TAG
1985: Mclaren - TAG
1986: Williams - Honda
1987: Williams - Honda
1988: Mclaren - Honda
1989: Mclaren - Honda
1990: Mclaren - Honda
1991: Mclaren - Honda
1992: Williams - Renault

Lotus last won a constructor's championship in 1978, Brabham last won a championship in 1967. Yes, they scored some individual race wins in the 80s, but so did, say, Mclaren, Alpha Tauri and Racing Point in the last couple years.

WRT Bernie, I point towards how stuff like prize money was handled in F1: The arrangement heavily favoured existing teams. Ferrari got a 70+ million dollar bonus just for being Ferrari, on top of their championship winnings (and notably, that's an amount that's higher then any team gets for winning the championship. If Ferrari blew up all their cars every race and didn't classify in the championship, they' would still have gotten more money then whoever won). It's a rich-get-richer scheme, and whilst Ecclestone and Mosley may have been giving lip service to the notion of cost caps, it's very obvious that in Bernie's actual dealings he couldn't care less. What he cared about is him solidifying his own source of income.

I have to say that I also find it slightly weird that Ecclestone would oppose DRS, since he has previously argued for sprint races, sprinklers, a medal system, a lottery grid system, the 2016 qualifying format and shortcuts in F1 :p. It's notable that a lot of the very unpopular changes in F1 (such as DRS!) popped up in response to declining viewer's figures, but Bernie never once considered that that might be because a lot of the F1 coverage moved to television channels not everyone could watch. Another aspect is the endless array of Tilkedromes that popped up over the years, the inclusion of some outright terrible racetracks like the Sochi autodrome, his opposition to Nico Rosberg winning the championship, stuff like making the Abu Dhabi GP get double points for some reason, whilst excluding classic F1 venues. The saga of Silverstone and Donington in particular was particurarely grueling if you're a fan of either track.

At least Stefano Domichelli is less openly corrupt (at the time of writing). We've seen the re-introduction of Imola, we'll most likely (knock wood) see the removal of DRS next year. Given Ecclestone's media statements since leaving, it's hard to see objectively some objectively good changes like the introduction of the halo and the removal of the Russia GP happen under his watch.
Click to expand...
Are you Ignoring Lotus winning many races and leading championships with Senna, and Brabham being twice WDC? You know what, i dont know if you did, but maybe you should watch the races, instead of just looking at the wikipedia page.

You keep going off topic. Now you talk about the tracks, Bernie, and all his ridiculous sound bytes for the media (most of them not serious), and even speculate what he would do or not do if he was still around, when the topic at hand was DRS or no DRS.

Also claiming Domenicalli is less "corrupt", after stating how Ferrari was in bed with FOM all those years is basically contradicting yourself.


I think you want to argue for the sake of arguing. So fine, you have your opinion, you like Modern F1, you think old races are boring, better end this here, and not derail the thread any more.

I will also point out that the DRS was supposed to have gone away with the 2014 rules too, under Bernie, and it never did, for the exact same reasons people are using to insist in keeping them now (and yes, the cars are maybe better following each other than they were in 2014, but thats a failure of FIA technical comission).
 
Last edited:

Latest News

Article information

Author
Damian Reed
Article read time
5 min read
Views
20,176
Comments
146
Last update
Join the discussion

Share this article

What's needed for simracing in 2024?

  • More games, period

  • Better graphics/visuals

  • Advanced physics and handling

  • More cars and tracks

  • AI improvements

  • AI engineering

  • Cross-platform play

  • New game Modes

  • Other, post your idea

Results are only viewable after voting.
See comments…
Back
Top