Hungarian Grand Prix 2016, Budapest - Race 11/21

You can't use points as a penalty due to them being of varying 'value' to different teams and at different points throughout the year. 1 point to Mercedes is nothing, while to Manor its everything. 10% of your points after the first race could be nothing, while 10% after the last race could be tens of points.

And while people may not deliberately crash to get a free gearbox, it would be very easy to fake damage to get one. "Accidentally" dropping the gearbox, etc.
 
Skeeter said:
You can't use points as a penalty due to them being of varying 'value' to different teams and at different points throughout the year. 1 point to Mercedes is nothing, while to Manor its everything. 10% of your points after the first race could be nothing, while 10% after the last race could be tens of points.

And while people may not deliberately crash to get a free gearbox, it would be very easy to fake damage to get one. "Accidentally" dropping the gearbox, etc.
Click to expand...

Percentages and rounding down can have the same effect across he board. As an example manor wouldn't lose their very valuable point in that instance. Also the punishments could be cumulative and applied as a constant over the season. That would discourage teams with no points from abusing the system if they think at some point they will get points.

The drivers, and the fans, need to stop being robbed of great racing.

Dropping a gear box is not an accident, by accident I mean on track event.
 
Skeeter said:
Have you read the articles? Hamilton has suggested it, while Toto is playing it down and trying to find ways to avoid doing it.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've read several articles on it. Hamilton has a preference - he didn't suddenly bring this revolutionary new idea to the team. Toto is looking at the options, with additional consideration to minimise sponsor embarrassment amongst other considerations. Hamilton just wants to win the WDC. Toto would like to win the constructors and would like to avoid unnecessary attention focussed on a failed Mercedes power unit.
 
CaptainRAVE said:
It did look like it was all over - it still might be, Hamilton has penalties incoming and with a bit more bad luck it could be enough to swing it in Rosber's favour.

I agree though - Rosberg should not have as many wins and I hope he doesn't get the championship. Changeable conditions e.g. Monaco and Silverstone really show him up tbh.
Click to expand...

Hamilton could beat Rosberg from the back of the grid, a 10 place grid penalty won't phase him if it ever comes to that.
 
Syla5 said:
Percentages and rounding down can have the same effect across he board. As an example manor wouldn't lose their very valuable point in that instance. Also the punishments could be cumulative and applied as a constant over the season. That would discourage teams with no points from abusing the system if they think at some point they will get points.

The drivers, and the fans, need to stop being robbed of great racing.

Dropping a gear box is not an accident, by accident I mean on track event.
Click to expand...

Tha last thing F1 needs is another complicated pointless rule.

The gearbox rule would be open to abuse if it allowed changes for damage. Like I said it would be so easy to fake it. All you need is your driver to have made light contact with something with his rear wheel, and you could then claim its damaged the gearbox and get a new one.

With the gearbox rules as they are they have to penalise every change otherwise they get into the grey area of trying to identify valid changes from invalid ones.

The better solution for gearboxes would be to have the same type of rules as PUs, i.e. a set amount per season but the ability to swap them about throughout the year.
 
Skeeter said:
Tha last thing F1 needs is another complicated pointless rule.

The gearbox rule would be open to abuse if it allowed changes for damage. Like I said it would be so easy to fake it. All you need is your driver to have made light contact with something with his rear wheel, and you could then claim its damaged the gearbox and get a new one.

With the gearbox rules as they are they have to penalise every change otherwise they get into the grey area of trying to identify valid changes from invalid ones.

The better solution for gearboxes would be to have the same type of rules as PUs, i.e. a set amount per season but the ability to swap them about throughout the year.
Click to expand...

So you are suggesting that to get a new gear box that teams would ask their drivers to crash (even lightly) on purpose??

I think you need to take a step back and consider what you just said..

How about just allowing un-penalised gearbox changes after accidents and rely on the teams not to repeat what Renault did in 2008.

Some clear examples where gear box penalties could have been waived due to accidents being the direct cause.

Austria - Kvyat, Rosberg
 
Thats not what I've said at all.

I've said it would be easy to use any contact as an excuse to claim for a new gearbox. I've not said teams will go and deliverately crash. They will bend the rules to benifit themselves. Like back when engines had to last 2 weekends, you would often see people who were outside of the points deliberately parking up and not finishing as if they didn't finish they were allowed to take a new engine.

Allowing the teams new gearboxes penalty free for certain situations will mean the teams will attempt to get themselves into that situation as often as possible.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom