F1 fans reject FOTA’s ‘Mario Kart’ wings

CommentPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Formula 1 in 2011?
Formula 1 in 2011?

The Formula One Teams’ Association’s plan to introduce adjustable rear wings has come in for fierce criticism from fans.

It’s not the wings themselves which have earned the most criticism but the rule which will only allow them to be used by a driver who is trying to overtake.

That was condemned as a “gimmick” which will create “artificial racing” in a poll of over 2,000 fans on F1 Fanatic.

Over two-thirds of fans were happy to see the introduction of adjustable rear wings – which will mimic the function of the F-ducts currently in use.

But only one in five support the rule which states that drivers can only use it when they are within one second of the car in front.

Many of the comments criticising the plan were aimed at that part of the rule:

We might as well save the money and get the drivers to sit in Sega?s Virtua Racing where the last car gets a speed boost over the leading car to provide closer racing and more overtakes.

Either let then have and use it when they want or don?t let them have it. It?s F1 and not a computer game.

That wasn’t the only response likening the rule to something out of a video game:

This rule is absolutely absurd, and if implemented, F1 will lose me as a viewer. You might as well put in Mario Kart-style bananas and blue shells ?ǣ it?s a complete and utter farce.

If FOTA wanted to find a way of allowing teams to make use of F-duct style moveable aerodynamics but without the inelegant solution of using a driver’s knee to control it, then the adjustable rear wing makes some sense.

But it’s easy to understand the criticism of a rule which would give a substantial and artificial advantage to a chasing car.

While F1 has been urged to many overtaking easier, fans believe this artificial device will make it too easy and therefore less exciting.

More importantly, it’s the difference between ensuring F1 is perceived as a form of motor sport, and not a world wrestling-style ‘sports entertainment’ gimmick.

Several drivers have criticised the plan for the same reason. Mark Webber told Autosport:

It is good for the PlayStation I think, but I don’t know how well it is going to work in F1. […]

Overtaking moves should be about pressurising, being skillful, and tactical. Yes we want to see more overtaking, of course we do, we know that, but we also need to keep the element of skill involved in overtaking and not just hitting buttons.
Mark Webber

The good news is it’s not too late for the FIA and FOTA to fix this rule. They must change it in time for next season, allow adjustable rear wings to be used throughout the race and keep ‘Mario Kart’ rules out of Formula 1.

Read more: Adjustable rear wings confirmed for 2011 ?ǣ but only for overtaking (Poll)


Browse all comment articles

124 comments on “F1 fans reject FOTA’s ‘Mario Kart’ wings”

  1. completely agree, this rule is even worse than bernie’s shortcuts idea.

    1. LOL. I think both the ideas were equally ridiculous. Im wondering what Bernie’s aging and senile mind comes up with next.

      1. I have no problem with the wing, and even the first two laps portion of the rule, but allowing the trailing driver to overtake while the leading driver is not allowed to defend is just ridiculous. Like Webber said, overtakes should be performed with skill, not the push of a button. I wish this wing and KERS would both just go away.

        1. You can’t have it both ways people. Either they try these new things and get criticised or they leave it the way it is and get criticised.

          At first I didn’t really like the ide but after having read up on it and know fully understand how it is going to be implemented, I am all for it.

          1. You can have it both ways, cutting reliance on aero would improve racing and wouldn’t be artificial in any way.
            Chalky, Perisoft and Mark Webber are totally correct.

          2. Personally, I think that Chalky and Mark and I should go out and have a drink to celebrate our rightness. Chalky, have you got Webbo’s mobile number? I think I might have accidentally deleted it out of my phone.

            (For what it’s worth, I’ve never complained about the lack of overtaking; first, I’m not sure it’s any worse than it’s ever been, and second, it’s the nature of racing. If you don’t like it, don’t watch – but don’t turn motorsport into a half-baked reality TV show because you’re easily bored.)

  2. I can’t understand reasons for opposing it… I think the FIA have done a great job with this rule.

    1. So people are opposing using the wings as a boost. But they’re for a KERS push to pass? It’s practically the same thing!

      Conflicting statements.

      1. Thought of this too, but KERS can be used to attack AND defend. So there is a difference.

        1. What will probably end up happening is that since they can’t defend their position with the wing, drivers with KERS will try and make their once per lap use to defend if another driver is close to overtaking…

      2. No its not. KERS can be used by any driver once a lap. It doesnt matter whether he is leading the GP, chasing a car in front, or just racing by himself at the end of the pack. A car does not have to be 1 second behind another car, at a certain part of the track to access a boost.

        1. Oh, did they change the rules for using KERS? In 2009 they could use it several times per lap for a total of 6 seconds or so.

        2. Yes, but the proposed idea was using it as a “push to pass” for the same purpose as the adjustable rear wing. It probably won’t happen but people are all for that to happen, but not the adjustable rear wing.

          1. “Push to pass” buttons are silly, whether KERS or this adjustable wing idea.
            Webber is absolutely correct.
            Less reliance on aero is the solution: adjustable front wings & ground-effect cars for instance.

      3. this is nothing like kers.

      4. It’s FOTA’s suggestion. FIA have nothing to do with it, other than accepting it.

    2. it is artificial and gimmicky, i watch f1 to see skillfull overtaking not ‘press a button and bam im past’ overtaking, it should be unlimited use or no use at all, thats what i like about kers, everybody can use it, it merely acts as a power boost.

  3. Everyone’s making a fuss out of nothing, I think. Odds are this will end up like the adjustable front wings – functional but ineffective.

    1. Well looking a blown rear wing (f-duct) the system is very effective in providing high top speed without sacrificing low to mid speed downforce.

      Also looking at the ruling by the WMSC, it does not ever limit the moveable parts to the Rear wing. Unless I am missing something, It only ever says Driver Adjustable bodywork.
      It leaves it very open to interpretation. What other parts of the car can engineers move to enhance straight line speed? Movable front wings? Moveable diffusers?

      1. Unless the scope of the “driver adjustable bodywork” is defined by a 1000 page manual with CAD data etc, i think it offers enormous amounts of freedom to come up with bodywork to be adjustable.

        They might just make the blown rear wing switch not through drivers knees/hands but by pushing a button that opens up a flap to enable air to flow through it. Just to name one possibility.

    2. That’s what I thought, but it’s the principal of the thing even if it does nothing.

  4. rear wings – mind how stupid and absurd they were in the early 70’s 80’s – if its on a car let it be used – unless is it’s so teams have more room for sponsors logo’s? – otherwise why bother??

  5. Fans are not dumb we know the difference between a driver and a racer. Using these buttons (KERS, adjustable wings) to supplement a lack of talent won’t cut it. A driver that can’t pass or defend without aids should be fired to make room for someone who can.
    A car that has limited pace and balance should focus on those areas instead of a button. What a Joke!!

  6. This rule is total crap and outrageous, preposterous, unheard of!

  7. The only upside I can think of is Kobayashi is still around next year, it’ll mean some interesting rear ending, Japanese style!

    1. anakincarlos
      25th June 2010, 7:46

      Thers something onthewing some thing?

  8. I hope the voice of fans and drivers combine to get rid of it.

    It needs to be done very fast though because they’re all starting on their 2011 cars and I’d imagine it’s alot of work to get this wing change right.

  9. Here’s even more drivers being just as sceptical about the rear wings and worrying about policing and safety aspects involved as most of us here are:

  10. I think that in the way the rule is intended (to aid overtaking), the method proposed is the only way it will work. If drivers are able to use it at any time then, similar to KERS, they will all use it in the same places, removing any advantage and therefore any point to what will no doubt be a very expensive piece of kit.

    In the end what it comes down to is how far you are willing to go to promote overtaking, there’s no time to make radical changes to the aerodynamics so if you want to make a change it has to be a so called gimmick. The F-duct certainly falls under that catagory, it has provided most of the overtaking this year and I dont see people complaining.

    1. thats becuase it was a clever aerodynamic innovation that somebody came up with, no different to the DD diffusor. nobody is stopping others from using it and nobody is making stupid rules about its use and when it can be used.

      1. Yes, but the only reason the F-duct is effective at all is because the other teams can’t copy McLaren’s version due to the cockpit regulations. If everyone was told at this point last year that the blown rear wing was an option then it would be back to a stalemate situation.

        As I alluded to in my first post, the only way to help natural overtaking in F1 is to radically change the aero regs to allow cars to follow each other through corners. Until that time we have to make do with giving the trailing car an advantage.

        It seems to me this change will only really have an effect on races where there’s a long enough straight with a fast corner preceeding it, such as the back straight at China, so the time lost due to dirty air in the corner will be regained by the loss of drag on the straight.

  11. I still think my solution (mandate the effect of area in the area behind a car) is the right one, but, isn’t this solution just a shortcut to where we want to be, namely that we don’t want the aero of the car in front to destroy the overtaking opportunity for the car behind?

    Now, I will argue that the wing should not do anything more than eliminate the loss suffered from following the car in front, but with that proviso I don’t see the problem.

  12. Im not sure what all the fuss is about. You can only use it when you are within 1 second of the car in front so you must be probably as quick if not quicker anyhow. It will stop drivers racing in fuel saving mode which makes a mockery of F1.There will be alot less of the lead car just cruising as he will know should the guy behing get anywhere close he will have a good chance to overtake. if he does overtake then you will have a battle to try and reovertake which would be good to see. Drivers will always be pushing, the car in front pushng hard to make sure the guy behind does not get within a second of him and the guy following will be pushing like hell to make sure he can get within 1 second so he can use the advantage. Its hardly mario kart blue shells now is it. Every driver has the same tool and it will mean all out racing. If the guy behing has used his kers then the lead car can use his to try and couter act the moveabe wing. I would be interested to know what happens after a safety car comes in, will they be able to use it straight away or wait for 2 laps as at the start of the race.

    1. It will stop drivers racing in fuel saving mode

      What makes you think that?

    2. this is a good point, any car in the 1 second window is usually just stuck there. this gives the driver something to compensate for the loss of downforce while following, so infact actually levels the field again.

      all of a sudden this doesn’t sound such a bad idea, and looks like something that actually addresses the problem of faster cars getting stuck behind slightly slower cars.

      I think I and most of the voters where too quick to write this one off, when infact we should be giving this idea a chance

  13. Best Article Picture. Ever.

    1. I agree – epic indeed!

    2. SNES mario kart, fantastic!

      1. Laughed so hard I had to change my pants!.

      2. unfortunatley this was the only mario kart without speed penalty as first placed player.
        this was the mario kart where the fastest always won

  14. While F1 has been urged to *many* overtaking easier, fans believe this artificial device will make it too easy and therefore less exciting.

    Should that be make?

  15. teeb123456789
    24th June 2010, 20:26

    What happens if the race leader is stuck behind a backmarker? Will he be allowed to adjust his wings? Or since it is technically not an overtake for position, will he not be allowed to?
    This could be very confusing when the leaders are negotiating backmarkers. (Think back to Canada when Button passed Alonso due to the slower car of Chandhock). Could backmarkers use the wings to un-lap themselves?

  16. Marc Connell
    24th June 2010, 20:31

    Just bring back turbos, any engine up to v12s, kers, adjustable rear wings, re fueling but also make an option available for teams who want to run a full race without refueling and only on one set of tyres.

    Bring back all the banned technology what made overtaking easy if you where a bad or good driver.

    No traction control or anti lock breaks. Maybe up the limited BHP to 1000bhp? Allow teams to tamper with more of the engines settings?

    I think allowing more engines will cause more over taking. If they where allowed a new engine every 2 or 3 races. They can afford to tamper with the engine to get more speed and sacrafice engines reliablity. They have the spare engines so why cant they max them out to get more speed to over take?

    Allow them to run engines what can survive top fuel dragster fuel ( 90% nitromethiane and 10% methanol )

    Endless possibliltys to make overtaking happen.

    I know all of this sounds mad but just imagine a F1 without rules and designers with no limitations.

    1. they should definately go down the motogp route with regards to engines, the greater the amount of cylinders the car has the greater the minimum weight, it would also be a good idea to limit the ammmount of fuel allowed for the race, then you would get all sorts of different developement routes.

    2. It would be a disaster.

  17. not that I like the idea, but just to point at something popular on the Playstation we seem to overlook in F1. The current rules favor the car onfront – i.e. it creates such a wake the chasing car simply cannot get close enough to pull a move. Not an exploding banana, but definitely an oily spot ;-) not so obvious, but equaly Playstation style :-) So FIA, please think of an auto-turn-off diffusers instead ;-)

  18. When the racing proves to be extremely exciting and there is tons of overtaking, then all the people complaining now are going to be worshipping the decision.

    1. No, because that will mean overtaking will be devalued due to the quantity and probable lack of quality. Plus, I imagine we’ll see a lot of overtaking on straights rather than in the braking zone, where it will be less exciting.

  19. I should be going to the F1 fans forum in London next week, I’m sure this will come up and make clear that this is not a good idea. I will do my best to give my opinion that this is a not a good idea

    1. That’s great Dan, thanks for that. I hope the guys being there take note and give this adjustable bodywork a good thinking before doing it.

  20. It’s a shame that no one has figured out a way to increase the length of the braking zones without either requiring retrograde technology or potentially increasing the hazards.

    1. Bartholomew
      25th June 2010, 13:14

      All they have to do is require smaller steel brakes – this is the most cost-effective way to overtake.

  21. ya know, this really is some video game crap. most racing games have a “feature” called auto-catch up – it silently improves the performance of racers in the back, so that poor players still get a feeling of “whew, close one! that was super fun!” and continue to spend money.

    i dare you to tell the difference.

  22. This one gets worse the more I reflect on it.

    It will, by definition, de-value passes altogether.

    Think of the best pass you ever saw, the one that had you leaping around the room. Maybe it was Mansell on Piquet at Stowe, or maybe it was Hakkinen on Schumacher around Zonta at Spa, or Alonso around Schumacher around the 130R, or…you get my drift. Now consider how great it would have been if you knew that the guy making the pass had a button that gave him, whatever, 10kph or 15kph more for no good reason, and the guy in front WASN’T ALLOWED TO USE HIS! Unbelievable. At least the “push to pass” in Champcar or KERS in F1 allowed both attacker and defender the option to use the ‘artificial’ boost, if they had all their ducks lined up, at least. And those rare passes that would have gone down in the annals of all-time classic F1 moments, well, they’ll be all over before they even reach the braking area now, they? It won’t even be close. And the extra passes we do get will all be, by definition, the result of an arbitrary rule that just hands the advantage to the guy who’s behind, for the tremendous virtue of…being behind. You might say there will be cases where the ‘wronged’ party who gets picked off like a sitting duck for the terrible error of being ahead will then be able to turn around and use the same method to re-pass, but (a) we all know it often doesn’t work like that, and (b) SO WHAT if it does happen??? It’ll then be back to square one but the unfair advantage will still be there, won’t it?

    Wrong, so wrong. It amazes me that there was a HUGE debate after Bahrain about how to liven things up and allow more passing moves, I actually tried to write down all the ideas at the time and I gave up after about 40 of them, but not one person said: how about having a moveable-wing-that-the-driver-behind-can-use-but-not-the-one-in-front-and-only-if-he’s-less-than-1s-behind-at-arbitrarily-defined-points-on-the-track-and-not-during-the-first-2-laps-and-can-you-tell-we’re-making-this-all-up-as-we-go-along?

    1. Sean, you took the words right out of my keyboard.

    2. A very good rant. Thumbs up.

      1. This. Sums up my feelings exactly.

  23. No aerodynamic surfaces independent of the main bodywork forward of the centre line of the front wheels, behind the centre line of the rear wheels …the aero guys would still have lots to work with…wings are so 1970’s

    1. i like the sound of that

  24. If they want an F-duct without the inelligent solution of using a knee, why not just allow it to be controlled by an electronic flap, which can be activated by a flap on the steering wheel by the thumb or index finger?

  25. I have the perfect solution for overtaking. The car behind can use the adjustable rear wing, and the car in front can use KERS. Can KERS outpace the low-drag car behind, or will it give a bigger slipstream? Who knows? Oh, the tension….

    1. Unless the car behind uses KERS as well..

  26. Perhaps FOTA should consider implementing a system that would allow the drivers of cars one second or less apart to manipulate each others rear wing. This option could only be activated after the halfway point, and only after the stewards of the meeting have designated the race, to that point, as being a total bore. :)

  27. Christian Ditch
    24th June 2010, 23:11

    Right, I don’t think this new rule is fantastic, because it’s far from that, and I hope that it gets amended before the start of next season.

    But I’m sick of hearing people saying that they’re going to stop watching F1 if they push the rule through. They’re the same people that said they’d stop watching after Indy-gate, Spy-gate, Spa-gate, Lie-gate, and every other minor scandal in F1!

    Seriously, it’s so tiring to hear empty threats continually.

    Even if the FIA push through this rule, we will all still continue to watch. People who take the effort to write on forums are NOT going to turn off from F1 because off some stupid rear wings rule!

    1. I know I’m not going to stop watching it. I would LIKE to, if rules such as this were passed, because it’s the only way I can think of expressing my outrage – but I’ll end up watching anyway. However, if F1 fans worldwide came to some sort of agreement to just refuse to watch the 2011 season, sure, I’ll jump on board :P

  28. Hi there! Haven’t posted in a good while, been rather busy. Just posted to say I generally agree with the gist of the article, especially as I voted in favour of such devices being used whenever required, but felt that the unnecessary slandering of Mario Kart to be particularly unpalatable. For a start it’s Super Mario Kart, one of the best racing games ever made, and for the record there are no blue shells or wings, not in the original anyway.

  29. So, let me get this straight:

    Devices which could be controlled by the driver from the cockpit were banned. McLaren got around this by just making it a hole in the car. Then that gets banned, and in its place we get…a device which can be controlled by the driver from the cockpit.

    1. Tom M in Australia
      25th June 2010, 0:34

      Traction control was banned. McLaren got round this just by adding an extra brake pedal. Then that got banned, and in it’s place we got traction control. Then that got banned…

    2. Yep, seems the ban on movable aero devices is gone. A victory for the engineers?

      Maybe we should add another rule using the ideas from the SWIFT indycar solution for 2012. Let the movable part have LED lights that light up if it is used to give the people watching a clue as to what is going on. A similar light can be used for KERS switching on or buffering engergy as well.

      That would be fun watching a light show.

      1. Yes, that does show the full gimmick at its best.

        Seriously, if they keep this rule, such LEDs should be done too, and then we can at least have a category in race strategy: overtake with/without LEDs.

        But on the other hand, this is a replacement for the lack of telemetry being shown in the race – if we had a diagram showing KERS,throttle/brake, gear, etc. for larger bits of the race, we would not need to have it on the cars so much.

  30. fecklessmoron (@)
    25th June 2010, 0:33

    I haven’t seen a whole lot wrong with the racing this year. F duct or not.

    I don’t see an adjustable rear wing creating Vettel vs Webber or Button vs Hamilton vs Button type of excitement any more than I think overly soft tires will create interesting races like Canada.

  31. Prisoner Monkeys
    25th June 2010, 0:44

    I think people will be more receptive to the system once they see it in action. The wings are only expected to yield an extra 15km/h, and so they hardly guarantee an overtake. I think it will be very difficult – if not impossible – to watch the racing next year and say “That pass only happened because of the rear wing”.

    1. I think that’s the problem. Many will just assume it was the rear wing.

      1. Prisoner Monkeys
        25th June 2010, 2:58

        Well, it’s pretty obvious that the wing has been designed to facilitate a driver’s skill in overtaking, not replace it. It doesn’t guarantee an overtake – all the defneding driver has to do is use KERS (or even just drive defensively), and the wing won’t do an iota of good.

  32. Why oh why am I not surprised by this. Just when you think F1 is rediscovering itself it wants to put a shotgun to its head and pull the trigger.

    Is anyone at FOTA watching this season. EVERYTHING IS OK… STOP CHANGING THINGS… ARRRGGHHHHH.

    I feel like I’m taking crazy pills here.

  33. Bartholomew
    25th June 2010, 2:19

    This idea is not very good, but KERS is even worse.

    1. Prisoner Monkeys
      25th June 2010, 3:00

      They’re trying to make KERS as attractive as possible to all the teams. It’s not compulsory, but the weight of the car has been inceased by 20kg so that anyone who doesn’t use KERS will still have a weight penalty. It won’t be the same as last year when only three teams ran it (and robbed Fisichella of victory in Belgium).

    2. KERS, at least, ticks the box of being a technology that we can see being useful in road cars in the future.
      Now, if they only changed the rules to allow a minimum number of uses per race, rather than per lap, we would also avoid the predictable patterns we saw in ’09, which effectively negated the battles on track.

  34. well, well… these are the rules…

  35. Whether you allow allow adjustable rear wings to be used throughout the race or you completely forget about this rule.

  36. Don’t know if this has been mentioned but I can see team mates using this to their advantage when they are together on the track. Driver A lets driver B past and then they alternate from sector to sector. Easiest way to establish a lead/catch up to a group

    1. LOL, that is inventive!

  37. With this we can think that the F1 is getting virtual…….. Many criticisms will be received from this virtual arena……

  38. Thinking about this logically. Is there any other sport that has rules like this? Player A can do (x) at this moment in time, but Player B cannot do (x) but can do (y). 5 seconds later Player A can do (y) but Player B cannot do (x).

    Football, tennis, tiddlywinks, snakes and ladders have concrete rules which apply to all players equally at all times. They don’t change EVERY YEAR, so why can’t F1? This rule tweaking is just job creation, someone justifying their pay cheque with dross like this.

    And to answer the person who says die hard fans won’t stop watching. They will eventually and they will stop new fans from following. (I will NEVER pay to go to a GP). You try explaining to anyone the ‘rules of F1’. Watch their eyes glaze over, watch the jaw drop as you tell them that frequently after the checkered flag, when you are done celebrating the finishing order is altered. Soon you’ll have to explain with calculator in hand, why teams are not taking part in the GP after flying round the world at great expense.

    /rant over// time to take the tablets.

    1. Maybe not in your version of snakes and ladders.

      I have devised a set of rules far superior to your petty common rules.

      S&LiA Rules
      (Snakes and ladders international association)
      1) If a superior player is by chance relegated by a snake, behind a much less able player, the lesser player will be shown a blue flag, and must allow the better player to move past.

      2) If a player does not attend a game meeting, the player will be fined $20 by the S&LiA.

      3) If a player is less than 2 places behind another, (s)he will be allowed to adjust the dice (Permo Marker) in order to gain advantage to assist passing.

      4) to save costs, the dice will be limited to the number 5.

      5) if a players die fails, the player may replace it at his own discretion.

      5a) if a players uses more than 5 dice in one day, for the following games he will start just off the board, at a position of negative five.

      6) If a liquid or solid object (food or drink) is spilled or dropped onto the playing area, all players must stay in position untill the mess has been cleared up by the Marshalls (Mum).

      6a) if this occurs when the leading player is less than 10 spaces from the end, Players will stay in formation and finish in their current order.

      1. LOL I like it. I’ll give these ‘improved for the show’ rules a try. I’ll tinker with them until My favored player wins or the others quit and take up Monopoly.

  39. Seems to me, that besides having an experienced driver helping the race stewards. They need a few to help these committees.

  40. This whole thing is ridiculous, F1 cars arn’t meant to have movable bodywork for starters, 2nd they are, as others have pointed out, into a game, and lessening the skill involved.

    The other thing that annoys me, is that there is a much better idea, right in front of them. I didn’t watch A1GP a lot, but as I understand it, all cars had a push to pass button, which raise the rev limiter on the engine for a short time. This would achieve the same thing as the moveable wing, but it would surely be a much more popular idea.

    The even better thing that A1 showed us, was how you can limit it, not by saying, only use it when you are behind, but by only letting drivers use it say, 10 times in a race. This wouldn’t fell like a game, it would feel like stratagy. Where all drivers have the same opportunity.

    Even if my idea isn’t liked. I feel the point about movable bodywork stands, It’s just not what F1 is meant to be.

    At any rate, I feel this movable read wing might end up like the moveable front wing. Invisible to the viewers, and only semi useful.

  41. These adjustable rear wings will be a lot less effective than McLaren’s f-duct. The f-duct can be used at all times and it allows McLaren to opt for more downforce without sacrificing drag.

  42. Maybe they could have spots on the track that light up at random. When a driver goes over the lighted spot, he will get one use of the adjustable rear wing.

    Just to add a little more excitement :)

    1. Add more balloons, I saw that in soccer, really livened things up…

  43. I don’t think it will make an incredible amount of difference. The F-Duct makes it “easier” for McLaren to overtake but it doesn’t make it “easy”. Although, we shall have to wait and see how effective the new adjustable wings are…

    Other series have used a “push to pass” system but I don’t think that turns a race into a video game. The drivers are still pounding round at breakneck speeds and high g-forces. They will still need to have incredible skill to overtake and to resist being overtaken. I think it will be fun to see more drivers having to defend aggressively like MSC in Canada.

  44. Also, I love Mario Kart. I mean, who doesn’t? If you ask me, the FIA should have been looking into this a long time ago. You want an audience in the US? Arm Chandhok with blue shells! You want more overtaking? Make drivers drive through tiny question marks on the track, and if they hit it just right, they’re allowed to use a turbocharger! Not to mention how undeniably cool it would be to have a huge jump over a lake…

    1. Dude, you are my mentor!

  45. I am against the idea of it only being available to the car trying to overtake as it is the racing too artificial.

    While it may not be too late to change the rule I doubt that the powers that be will.

  46. hmm plenty of fans dont like kers but that doesnt make them right. i think its a good idea and if it needs tweaking once its introduced then so be it. I think the level of overtaking is ok at the moment but it has been difficult generally over the last 10 years. Why reject something that makes it possible?

    1. KERS reduced the amount of overtaking because it was primarily used as a defensive weapon (it’s more effective that way than as an overtaking tool). It’s not a question of rejecting something that makes overtaking possible – it’s rejecting something that achieves the rare combined feat of making overtaking tougher and cheapening the value of the passes that do happen.

  47. Just to let you know, I loved Virtua Racing when it was in the arcades, but I stopped racing it because of the speed boost. It was the most frustrating part, when leading a race on the final lap and the guy in last uses the speed boost to win.
    There is no defence against this as a leading driver, other than to weave and block.

    I do not want to see an artificial overtake for a win in F1 and neither will the drivers. In fact, if it’s made that easy to pass, ironically we could get less passing with the 2nd place driver just holding station until the last lap as with what I experienced in Virtua Racing.

    Let’s hope FOTA listen to the fans on this.

  48. i dont get this, you didnt like it on some 90s videogame so it wont work in f1 in 2011. eh?

    for 1 who says its going to make it “easy” for 2, on tracks when the dirty air makes it very difficult to overtake, this may help a faster car stay close and nail the overtake where previously they would drop back. i thank god we elect a commitee to sort these things out and fans aren’t always listened to

    1. you didnt like it on some 90s videogame so it wont work in f1

      The objection isn’t that it won’t work, it’s that it’s not appropriate for F1.

    2. i dont get this, you didnt like it on some 90s videogame so it wont work in f1 in 2011. eh?

      As Keith says, it’s not appropriate for F1.
      We should not be reducing the skill required to overtake buy providing a push to pass system that favours only the driver that is behind.

  49. It’s a gimmick though. Why not allow decent front tyres back to improve grip – that would help offset the aero problem. And lose the dumb “you must use both tyre types” rule – let them choose what tyre they want and when…

  50. So, this idea is to replicate a driver getting into the tow of another driver, then. Except, once they get out of the tow to go past, they still have the extra pace.

    And of course, the purity of the racing is gone, but hey, itll attract the US viewers in!

    We dont need overtakes willy nilly, where being in front is being penalised – at least before once they got out of the tow they were out of the tow, and you could still defend. What is needed is more opportunity for overtaking, but the drama and importance of the overtake only stays if it then hands a defendable advantage to the car in front, where its not a given that the place will just be taken back.

    1. Let me speak for all 300 million U.S. citizens and say, no. We like our socialist-style racing just fine, but we don’t like anything from “socialist” countries.

    2. I think it will just make it more of a mistery why anyone is interested for the US viewers!

      Doing something expensive and complicated you can also acheeve with a pretty simple push to pass button (not saying that is a good solution, just easier), that will just show Americans how the “old continent” makes life complicated for itself

  51. er the driver is quicker but gets slowed down by dirty air, it may help it may not. its certainly not a gimmick and racing is certainly not “pure” – what a naive view that is!! racing stopped being pure in 1959..if it ever was

    1. The dirty air business is not relevant. This is for passing on a straight, where straight line speed matters. Dirty air is good in this context. Of course the FIA has not specified where it can be used, but the scenario of the pre-ordained part of the track being in a corner seems a fairly ineffective opportunity for passing at most tracks. Passing mid-corner is not going to happen, unless the new wing position allows the driver behind to fly. It would have been totally useless in ths mode at Montreal, for example, anyway.

      And you would still need to lay down the wing on the next straight. But then we basically have a ridiculous scenario where the car behind is given the full moveable-aero advantage for all or most of the lap that the sport has worked for a generation to prevent on various grounds. Leaving aside this shocking volte face of safety and performance-limiting policies, it would make a mockery of all passing. There is no way to consider this new rule not being absurd.

  52. well its loaded in favour of the guy in front at the moment so this is A WAY of rebalancing it. to say it is against the ethos of F1 is ludicrous, what about skirts, self righting suspension, driver aids, telemetry, pit to car radio, turning up and down revs. they could all be considered impure…..and ANYWAY, they can already alter the front wings! staggered you agree Keith

    1. I have to disagree with you.

      well its loaded in favour of the guy in front at the moment so this is A WAY of rebalancing it

      There are other methods to assist in overtaking that can be used. Preferably ones that are not criteria limited, applicable to only one of the drivers battling for position.

      what about skirts, self righting suspension, driver aids, telemetry, pit to car radio, turning up and down revs.

      and these are not restricted to a single driver at one time over another.

      Allowing this rule sets a precedence that making adjustments of this sort are ok. What would be next? If you are 5 secs behind another driver you can use traction control? If you are 10 secs behind another driver you can use 1000rpm above the rev limit?

    2. Allowing this rule means that if a driver does adjust their wing to pass, then their car won’t be as good at getting round the corners. They don’t appear to be allowed to re-adjust it until the next checkpoint. This means that the car will be easily re-passed on the next corner and lose ground to the car it was attempting to pass for the rest of the sector.

      In other words, the wing not only introduces a level of artifice and unfairness, but is counter-productive to overtaking. A complete waste of time and energy which will probably lead to an adjustable wing ban in 2012 or 2013 one the teams realise just how pointless this implementation is.

  53. yes i remember all the “expert” debate when refueling was banned. All of it was conjecture and most of it was wrong. Why not wait and see? I personally cant see a “principle” or a “pureness” in racing that is lost. You can turn the revs up at the moment whats the difference in that and turning your wing down??

    1. ANYBODY can turn their revs up at ANY time, just like ANYBODY can use kers next year at ANY time they see fit. This new rule is BS, it is more appropriate to something like mariokart.

  54. grosjeans.rubble
    25th June 2010, 14:35

    how about random powerups throughout the course?! you run them over and it enables either f-duct, KERS, active suspension, or adjustable wing. these could be good for the sector only.

    hmmm maybe we can get codemasters to include it in this year’s f1 as an easter egg!

    1. or maybe you could have a squid that flies up to the car up front and sprays ink all over their visor.

  55. reductio ad hitlerum

  56. Am I the only one who thinks if the guy behind is already close enough, he will have a slipstream advantage and rear wing stall so the overtake will happen before arriving at the next corner? Seriously, who wants to see cars overtaking eachother on the straight?

    What a farce that rule is! Why dont we implement some catch-up logic into engine management systems while we’re at it, like Need for Speed games? If a driver is too much in front, his engine will produce less power so that the others can catch up and liven up the race.

  57. with everyone getting so upset about it being like a video game they played once, no one seems to have mentioned that if a car is overtaken by a car using a lowered wing then they can also use the lowered wing once hes passed. i look forward to the reasons why this is rubbish, wont happen, isnt pure etc

    Nothing is ever as simplistic as we think and the law of unintended consequences means that any rule changes will mix things up. But hay, if it reminds you of playing mario bros,it shouldnt happen, right.

    1. Maybe things aren’t as ‘simplistic’ as you think, but it seems you’re not thinking very much, so that’s not surprising.

      Please stay away from racing. Just… can you go do something else? You, and everyone like you: Leave.

      And don’t let the door hit you in the a** on the way out.

    2. One of the problems of this rule is that the overtakers *have* to use the lowered wing once passed, meaning that their overtaking will be very easily negated. Twice the passing for absolutely no additional sporting meaning or narrative value on that lap, followed by several laps of no attempt being possible because the following car is too far away. Overtaking should have a point – because a mistake was made, a gap was seen or a car was mechanically better than another – not be something that happens merely to satisfy some outside “quota”.

  58. Does the new regulation permit rear wings to pivot up and down like the original wing car, the Chaparral?

    So you’d push a button and the wing would lie flat, then you’d brake and a little motor or gas piston would push the wing back into position?

    Seems unsafe. Why not push the button and a little parachute deploys on the car in front?

  59. theRoswellite
    26th June 2010, 2:23

    A couple of points (or questions?)

    One result of a variable rear wing, if it turns out to be highly successful in providing a passing advantage to the following car, may be that cars will not want to be leading on a final lap, but instead holding close to the car ahead and waiting for the last lap or even last corner. Is this what FOTA wants to see happen…cars attempting to obtain the best “position of advantage” instead of the going for the lead?

    It can provide for great tactical racing…close racing…and exciting finishes, but certainly if leading the race becomes a serious disadvantage, we will all be witnessing a very different F1…for better or worse.

    Also, in previous remarks I questioned the implementation, safety and simplicity of operation of this rule change, my problem was primarily related to restrictions existing around the one second rule. Hopefully, it will be clear and not issue in a season of protests and post-race DQ’s.

    But, I must admit that I am a closet techno-freak. I would enjoy seeing the designers turned lose to use variable body work, KERS in an unlimited way and find new advantages such as the F-duct, as long as the rules worked to make the cars more energy efficient and reduced or eliminated downforce and the unwanted stepchild: wake turbulence.

    Subsequent rule changes could work to maintain parity in the field without resorting to any highly “artificial” means…an obviously very subjective term.

  60. Several people (including so called experts on TV) have been calling this ridiculous because it might mean being 2nd into the last lap might be a better position and 1st.

    This is true in many forms of motorsport, particularly in MotoGP and WSBK, where, if the line far enough from the last corner, riders can slip stream past each other and get ahead before the line.

    This adds tactics to the wheel to wheel racing part of things. So far in F1, we’ve only had tactics to avoid racing or just to go faster.

    Having said that, other forms of motorsport get this situation naturally, by nature of their machinery. They don’t resort to adding 3 extra buttons for the driver to play with. It’s just as silly as all these power boost buttons in Indycar and A1GP.

    Let’s get back to the main problem. How to get cars to follow each other and make the draft more effective, without cheat buttons.

  61. To me the new gimmick as just more of the same: a flawed concept. Why can’t we get rid of high-downforce aero?

  62. whether it was over the line or behind the line its the same result: the germans win

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.