The dispute between Mads and Asanator is a classic logomachy (word war). Mads means “by changing the aerodynamics of the car” something much broader than Asanator does. Mads definition includes virtually everything that happens to, or by, the racecar that alters the airflow over, under, or in the car. Braking, for example, does the opposite from applying power. Should brakes (or their application) be considered in the definition? At some point, it seems, there must be an agreement on what is meant by “changing the aerodynamics of the car” before the dispute can be resolved. Otherwise the dispute is just so much straw. FIA is in the process, obviously, of trying to “fine tune” the definition in mid-stream, so to speak. They wouldn’t be doing it if the definition and its application to the physical situation didn’t need clarification. FIA has to decide what problem it is they want any clarification of the rule(s) to solve. However they decide it, someone’s ox will be gored.
