Fuel Level Cause Race Disrepute

[turbof1]

What that does not explain to me is why Rosberg wasn't really into trouble (Brawn claimed he was, after the race, but during the race not one single message was directed towards Rosberg that he had fuel issues, while they went crazy with it on Hamilton's radio. Nobody with a healthy mind believes that Rosberg had fuel issues).

Either they splitted the strategies, with Hamilton boarding less fuel and hoping for rain, with rosberg being the "safe strategy" and having dry race fuel levels.

OR

Rosberg was able to save up all that fuel to make up for the deficit. I feel that is less likely, because Hamilton had to start saving fuel at an early point; I don't see Rosberg saving up that much fuel.

[Pup]

Hamilton also seemed to have more fuel problems at McLaren than his teammates. Perhaps his driving style is just a bit more fuel-thirsty and Merc haven't quite adjusted for it yet?

[zac510]

Waking up early and sitting on your couch doesn't really entitle you to dictate the rules and reguations of an international motorsport racing series unfortunately.

[Pup]

You don't say.

[FrukostScones]

What that does not explain to me is why Rosberg wasn't really into trouble (Brawn claimed he was, after the race, but during the race not one single message was directed towards Rosberg that he had fuel issues, while they went crazy with it on Hamilton's radio. Nobody with a healthy mind believes that Rosberg had fuel issues).

Either they splitted the strategies, with Hamilton boarding less fuel and hoping for rain, with rosberg being the "safe strategy" and having dry race fuel levels.

OR

Rosberg was able to save up all that fuel to make up for the deficit. I feel that is less likely, because Hamilton had to start saving fuel at an early point; I don't see Rosberg saving up that much fuel.

Brawn stated that ROS saved fuel because he was in HAM's slipstream and also saved more fuel by being able to use the DRS more oftenly...

[zac510]

You don't say.

My point, albeit blunt, was that the fans' sense of entitlement is often misplaced and disproportionate to their contribution to the sport. It's human nature to think you're important, though. Complaining on internet forums really isn't going to get far and it's rarely met with support from other forum posters either.

[Pup]

It's human nature to think you're important, though. Complaining on internet forums really isn't going to get far and it's rarely met with support from other forum posters either.

Thanks for the advice. And do keep me up on how far that randomly directed condescension of yours gets you with us other forum posters.

[turbof1]

Ah common Pup, let him be. You know going in on it will only result in further derailing.

[Pup]

You're no fun at all.

[turbof1]

Turbof1, screwing trolling all over the internet since 1989.

(To be honest, I'm getting a little bit annoyed too by this "you're just a forum" argument"; we are not here to have any difference in f1, only to discuss it. Why can't some people understand this relative simple concept?)

[zac510]

I'm not ragging on the forum; I like the forum, although I mostly lurk. For the record my post was not directed at Pup. More at anybody who is calling for kneejerk rule changes because they disagree with the current ones.

I just wonder; why get all irate about the rules and current strategic nature of F1? Is it impossible for some people to enjoy it at all without the rules being to their idea of perfection? If you carry a utopian deam for F1 then you're going to be forever finding reasons why F1 does not match your dream instead of just watching and enjoying it.

[voidnz]

My only issue is the mincing about at the end of a race. Turning the engine down to stroll home, as a fan who pays to watch I want racing to the end. Can they implement a rule so that the driver is unable to adjust the engine mode and can only save fuel by altering his driving style.

[mx_tifoso]

What's the difference between a map that uses less revs/fuel and just coasting and short shifting? In the end, they both have the same outcome.

And if a team can save engines by turning down the speed then fine, I think that this is tolerable especially compared to the crap Pirelli's that force teams into not going all out, where the option to go 10/10's for the entire race isn't even there if you want to win.

[MOWOG]

I agree with those who say a race car can't be at 10/10ths the entire time. It's the difference between a drag race and an endurance race. Nobody runs qualifying lap speeds at LeMans for 24 hours. There has to be a certain amount of pacing involved, and going just fast enough to win.

That being said, cruising around for a 1/3 to 1/2 the race is a travesty and an insult to the fans.

Now that it is an open secret that the teams at the top of the field cannot actually race the entire distance without running out of fuel, what's to keep one of the lesser teams, such as Force India, for putting on some extra fuel at the beginning of the race and letting its drivers keep their feet on the throttle longer than the boys up front? It's possible such a strategy could put that team closer to podium contention at the end. And severely discomfort the so-called dominant teams, who would then have to tell their drivers to push to avoid being embarrassed by being passed by a Caterham! Then the top teams would have to start adding more fuel for the race as well, which would help correct the pathetic situation we are seeing now.

[raymondu999]

It's possible such a strategy could put that team closer to podium contention at the end.

It's also possible such a strategy could put that team further out of the points at the end. They'd have to be carrying a heavier fuel load, meaning cornering, accelerating and stopping slower, as well as getting more tyre wear.