F1 Fanatic

I disagree with you here. I am a fan of the DRS, so allow me to explain my point of view.

2011 has given us overtaking but now that the stats are out, it works out that DRS overtakes were only about 30% and I think people are now realising tyres play a much more crucial role than DRS.

I like the DRS and I believe that this is a good thing. In my opinion, having the majority of overtaking moves in the sport being DRS related would be a terrible thing. That’s not what it’s designed for. As you don’t need me to remind you, the DRS was born out of the desire to counter the ‘dirty air’ effect. How many times have we seen genuinely faster cars or drivers close up to a slower rival and then struggle to find any way passed as soon as they get within 1-2 seconds behind? The disturbance to the aero balance of the cars would make it just too difficult for even the best drivers in the world to actually get into a position to make a move in the first place. The idea of the DRS is not to produce easy ‘slam-dunk’ overtaking opportunities but to allow drivers to get into positions to overtake where they have usually been unfairly disadvantaged by dirty air. I hear a lot about how DRS gives the attacking driver an unfair advantage but I disagree. DRS is an equaliser. It helps to take away the disadvantage of dirty air and give drivers a chance to pass.

The main gist of the article is that DRS overtakes happen mostly in places where overtaking will happen anyways and it takes away from the spectacle of memorable great overtakes.

I challenge that argument. First of all, the majority of the spectacular passes I can remember this season have taken place outside of DRS zones. I think I can remember more passes into Turn 1 at the Nurburgring last month than into the Chicane at the end of the DRS zone. Like I said earlier though, this is a good thing. It also means that the art of race craft and overtaking ability is no less important in the DRS era than it was before it, which I agree is an important thing for the pinnacle of motorsport. “But Geoffrey, what about Istanbul? DRS it WAY too easy to overtake at the end of the straight!” Yes. I agree. I can’t argue against you there. However, DRS is a unique and completely brand new concept. It’s bound to take a bit of time for the FIA to tweak it and to discover where it does and where it doesn’t work so effectively. I agree to an extent that it’s unnecessary to place DRS zones on long straights where lots of overtaking has always tended to occur. I’m also not convinced about the idea of double DRS zones. But it’s good that the FIA are clearly learning about what’s working and what isn’t and are adjusting the use of DRS accordingly.

Ultimately, I’m very much for the retention of DRS. I believe it can be an effective tool for equalising the playing filed like I outlined earlier. I also disagree that it’s ‘destroyed the art of defensive driving’. I’ve watched every race this season and the majority of DRS ‘attempts’ I’ve seen throughout the season have not resulted in overtakes. You still have to be in a good position to make the maximum use of it and get passed. Button didn’t simply drive around Massa in Melbourne did he? And on the other hand, if it wasn’t for DRS, I doubt Alonso would’ve ever made that move on Webber in Valencia. So to say that it’s spoiling F1 racing or whatever is just bizarre to me.

I also think the DRS factor adds a whole new unique element to racing. Remember when Hamilton was chasing down Vettel in Barcelona towards the end of the race? I remember everyone saying that as soon as Lewis was within 1 second, it was on like Donkey Kong. I think it’s both cool and exciting when you see a car get within 1 second of a rival and you see that DRS graphic start flashing. It’s like it’s the F1 equivalent of a fighter pilot getting a lock-on on a target. You think “oh my, here we go!” and you just know that something dramatic is about to occur. I also like the fact it’s an element that’s unique to F1. It helps to differentiate Formula 1 racing from the other single-seater series as well as illustrating just how important the physics of downforce and aerodynamics are to F1 cars.

So, yeah. I’m a fan of DRS and while I agree it’s not yet been ‘perfected’ I hope the sport doesn’t discard the idea too quickly because it’s played a significant role in shaping the truly exceptional action we’ve seen so far this season.

I agrees with Ned. It might not have been necessary to have 1 and it certainly wasn’t necessary to have 2 zones at Canada- also, 2 zones meant if somebody passed in the first zone they could continue pulling away in the second. If there isn’t a second activation point then it is just lazy (I fail to believe it isn’t incredibly simple for the best minds in the world to prepare a second trigger) and there shouldn’t be a second DRS zone at all.

I think the DRS works simply because the main concern – that it would make overtaking too easy – has not happened. When it was first annouced, everyone assumed drivers would just sail past one another. But as we’ve seen time and time again, the DRS only really allows an attacking driver to get into a positon where a pass is possible, but by no means guaranteed. In the instances where we’ve seen drivers blast past someone as if they were standing still, the relative speeds of the two cars meant that the pass would have happened with or without DRS.

It’s lazy thinking to look at DRS, point out how one-sided it is and then deride it for it. For over a decade we’ve had easier defending because of the dirty air problem, but because it’s not something that happens at the flick of a switch people don’t think about it. Thus some people say, look at all this overtaking, it’s so cheap but fail to see that the car ahead keeping its place because of dirty air is just as illegitimate. Some might say that’s what makes overtaking in F1 a skill, but I disagree. The skill is even keeping the car close enough once you’re in the dirty air. It’s like a calculator exam in maths; you may have a machine to help you, but the questions themselves are more difficult in the first place.

I always point this out when explaining DRS to people and so far none of them have stuck to thinking one situation is illegitimate but the other okay. Some do say that the situation shouldn’t be like that in the first place though, which I fully agree with.

Scrap DRS; and let’s go to the initial offerings of a new set of regulations based on underfloor development and ground effect

Yes that’s right Geoff. The key is if you’re able to tune the DRS zone to such a level of perfection that it equals the dirty air disadvantage minus the slipstream advantage over a lap. Given different cars produce different levels of wake; and different cars are affected to different levels by wake; not an easy task.

What I absolutely despise is their separation of DRS detection versus activation. Ideally, in my view; they should make the DRS activation the detection as well. i.e. Car A is chasing Car B. Car B crosses the DRS line into the activation zone. Just have a timing beam right there that has a countdown timer of 1second to be reset after any car has crossed. If another car crosses the line before the 1s is up; then let him have DRS.

I hate how the detection is nowadays. I hate it when people can use DRS when others are pitting; and even if they have already overtaken before the zone starts. Also the detection line takes away a potential overtaking spot in most places. For example the hairpin at Canada used to be alright for overtaking; now you can’t; as if you did overtake into the hairpin you’d get canned by DRS on the way out

There is also another more interesting side to DRS which no-one seems to have mentioned which is that a driver in the lead of the race cannot now just cruise to victory if the 2nd place man is catching him at a reasonable pace. As we saw in Canada and even to an extent in Japan it can make the end of a race as exciting as the start as drivers push to keep the chasing driver over a second behind.

If we didn’t have DRS would Jenson have passed Vettel on that last lap, probably not as Seb wouldn’t have been pushing as hard and probably wouldn’t have slithered off the track in the damp.

Ultimately what I am trying to say I suppose is that we have stopped seeing drivers ‘settle’ for 2nd or even the lower places as there is now the opportunity to pass where before there was none (or rarely one).