[Official] Singapore Grand Prix 2024

[Akrapovic]

Getting DOTD vote for a rubbish drive with an appalling strategy is the most Danny Ric send off ever.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Richard C

It seems as if everyone is treating this race as Daniel's last. So the rumor is looking more real. https://youtu.be/7vTGFqzVVC4?si=hNGskDKipCEoVNbJ

Richard

That came across to me as a bit of a DR saying I know something you dont, but im keeping as brave a face as I can.

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by EastonNeston

Also, the onboards from Perez showed a lot of front wing deflection on the Red Bull car, hopefully that is investigated.

You could say the same about the Sainz wing.

[Tourer]

Yeah - I must admit to feeling emotional about the possible (probable?) end of Dani's F1 driving career - but then I'm Australian and he's meant a lot to us here for a few years now.

Anthony Davidson made a good point during one of the Sky paddock pundit sessions - said that Dan was incredibly precise in the way he drives and that the current cars don't reward that as much - need to be wrenched around more, and that makes a big difference.

Given that he's only 35 now, there's a part of my that would love to see him still driving in 2026, in case the new cars reward precision again but I know that's probably unrealistic.

[Richard C]

While RB placing the call to VCARB to have Daniel come back in for a second set of softs (poor guy made three pit stops and was already on softs when they pulled him back in at the end) to steal the fastest lap from Lando makes sense for RB, but what (if any) rules exist for collusion between teams to manipulate the results? We talk about it being a "team sport" and that asking drivers to swap places, or ruin their race to hold someone up to benefit the other driver, etc. are valid. But when multiple actively work together is that allowed?

Now, we all assume that RB placed the call to VCARB because there was zero reason for DR to make the attempt. You might say in hindsight it was some type of "going away present", but frankly it feels more like a slap to just use DR as a tool to benefit a driver in another team. If this is DR's last race, imagine the request... do this for us... ok, thank you, good bye!

Richard

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by EastonNeston

Even worse!
It should not have happened, Coulthard was there to carry out the interviews, nothing else.

you must be fun at parties

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Richard C

While RB placing the call to VCARB to have Daniel come back in for a second set of softs (poor guy made three pit stops and was already on softs when they pulled him back in at the end) to steal the fastest lap from Lando makes sense for RB, but what (if any) rules exist for collusion between teams to manipulate the results? We talk about it being a "team sport" and that asking drivers to swap places, or ruin their race to hold someone up to benefit the other driver, etc. are valid. But when multiple actively work together is that allowed?

Now, we all assume that RB placed the call to VCARB because there was zero reason for DR to make the attempt. You might say in hindsight it was some type of "going away present", but frankly it feels more like a slap to just use DR as a tool to benefit a driver in another team. If this is DR's last race, imagine the request... do this for us... ok, thank you, good bye!

Richard

I was thinking the same. It's bad enough when team-mates help each other, but I've just had to swallow that because it's been going on too long and is never going to end any time soon. But it does feel like McLaren are playing to Queensbury Rules and Red Bull are MMA.

[chillibowl]

i had thought that if the driver with the fastest lap was outside the top 10 they didnt get a point...ostensibly to avoid a backmarker with nothing to lose affecting the points table.

i hadn't realized (or assumed incorrectly) that this would also invalidate the FL set by a driver who was within the top 10. which i guess makes perfect sense because why should someone (Norris in this case) get a point for setting the second fastest lap.

simplest solution seems to be just to do away with any points for FL?

[E.B]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

simplest solution seems to be just to do away with any points for FL?

Ding ding ding. Correct answer.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i had thought that if the driver with the fastest lap was outside the top 10 they didnt get a point...ostensibly to avoid a backmarker with nothing to lose affecting the points table.

i hadn't realized (or assumed incorrectly) that this would also invalidate the FL set by a driver who was within the top 10. which i guess makes perfect sense because why should someone (Norris in this case) get a point for setting the second fastest lap.

simplest solution seems to be just to do away with any points for FL?

Its still the fastest lap but if they are outside the top ten, they don't get the point.

So, Danny stole the Fastest lap but doesn't get the point for it,

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

simplest solution seems to be just to do away with any points for FL?

Maybe?

You have to ask why they added it in the first place.

I believe they added it to help provide potential for something interesting to happen late in the race. This goes back to concerns (or a time period) in which processional racing and lack of passing and "excitement for the viewer" was primary topic. Same things that drove need for DRS.

I think it's also only awarded for the top 10 to actually try to prevent something like what DR did. That if the point was available for all positions, then there might be chaos near the end of the race in which those fully out of the points would all pit for qualifying laps at the very end while on low fuel. Imagine if positions 11+ all dove for the pits on the last lap or two. It likely would take away from the goal of showing someone actually win the race! Drivers out of the points trying to steal points away the ability for someone in the top 10 to get that point was probably not a scenario that much thought was put into. I really think they thought it was going to be more about those in the top 10 than drivers deeper in the pack doing it purposefully.

I am fine with how it is today. I am fine with someone out of the points having the ability to steal the potential for someone else to get the point. My concern is the potential collusion between different teams in doing this to manipulate championship points. There doesn't seem to be a rule against this. So how far can you go with this? Can the collusion be open and public? Can a team pay another team to do this. What happens when this becomes more commonplace or blatantly obvious? I think the above seems both allowable and also quite ugly from an view of what the sport is trying to do from a competition perspective.

I will say I don't buy the "lets give Daniel a fast lap before he leaves the team" aspect. Because they might use that explanation to justify "why", but at the same time they can't come right out and say "Daniel is out". It seems like a retcon of what happened.

Richard

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Its still the fastest lap but if they are outside the top ten, they don't get the point.

So, Danny stole the Fastest lap but doesn't get the point for it,

Which leaves a rather sour taste in my mouth. A team and driver doing something which served no purpose for either of them just because 'another team' and 'another driver' would benefit from it.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Its still the fastest lap but if they are outside the top ten, they don't get the point.

So, Danny stole the Fastest lap but doesn't get the point for it,

Which leaves a rather sour taste in my mouth. A team and driver doing something which served no purpose for either of them just because 'another team' and 'another driver' would benefit from it (at best) or because they were directed to by that team (at worst).

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Which leaves a rather sour taste in my mouth. A team and driver doing something which served no purpose for either of them just because 'another team' and 'another driver' would benefit from it.

I wish I made that point in my post above. VCARB/Daniel is not in any type of a points fight with McLaren/Lando!

Richard

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard C

I wish I made that point in my post above. VCARB/Daniel is not in any type of a points fight with McLaren/Lando!

Richard

The thing is - AM/Alonso were not in a points fight with Red Bull/Verstappen in Austria either.....

[chillibowl]

reading the responses, im racking my brain, as i imagine the rules makers are currently, trying to think up clever ways where they can keep the fastest lap while not having it affect the end of races with unneeded action or chaos, prevent collusion, make it more exciting, more chances to mention the Pirelli soft option, give us our talking points etc etc...a point for fastest lap should not be this complicated right!

its like a microcosm of everything both good and bad with F1!

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

The thing is - AM/Alonso were not in a points fight with Red Bull/Verstappen in Austria either.....

Good point. I had forgotten about that. I guess the question ends up being... what is the motivation for teams or drivers to purposefully pit for new tire just as part of a fast lap attempt. My guess... As Alonso was having a bad day so he wanted to prove a point? Or maybe poke Max in the eye by stealing a point? Who knows. I think there is no way to avoid this situation short of removing the fastest lap point, or other rule change for how that point is awarded. As I mention earlier, my main concern is if cross team collusion is allowed or not.

Richard

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard C

Good point. I had forgotten about that. I guess the question ends up being... what is the motivation for teams or drivers to purposefully pit for new tire just as part of a fast lap attempt. My guess... As Alonso was having a bad day so he wanted to prove a point? Or maybe poke Max in the eye by stealing a point? Who knows. I think there is no way to avoid this situation short of removing the fastest lap point, or other rule change for how that point is awarded. As I mention earlier, my main concern is if cross team collusion is allowed or not.

Richard

Personally, I think it would make more sense if the fastest lap point was awarded to the driver who finished in the points with the fastest lap, regardless of whether anyone outside of the points had a quicker time.

That way, it removes (almost entirely) the chance of a team risking points for a FL point.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Personally, I think it would make more sense if the fastest lap point was awarded to the driver who finished in the points with the fastest lap, regardless of whether anyone outside of the points had a quicker time.

That way, it removes (almost entirely) the chance of a team risking points for a FL point.

That would work. The main issue is that it might no longer be "the fastest lap" if someone further back sets a faster time. They could just call it something else. Something like "bonus point".

Another option is to just extend points beyond 10th and open up more points competition to a larger group. Many times it seems like late race, for those who nowhere near 10th that it's just "bring it home" mode. I am curious if points go beyond 10th that it might generate more interesting things deeper in the field. But I know there are problems with extending points deeper as well.

Richard

[P38 in workshop]

I don't mind being in a minority of one but I like the idea of a point for fastest lap.It adds a bit of interest later in the race and stops it deteriorating into procession with the pace dictated by the state of the tyres.If anything has to go,I'd much rather we lost DRS.

[Greem]

I'm not going to do the stats, but I'd quite like to see one or the other of a system where points are awarded to everyone:

1. Finishing position, lowest aggregate score is the champion
2. Inverse finishing position, highest aggregate score is the champion

Both of them reward finishes, and both reward consistency, but I can't help thinking that both of them may have some perverse incentives hiding in them.

Then add or subtract bonus points for lap time, qualifying, positions gained/lost etc.

I'll stand back now while crmalcolm does the number crunching

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Personally, I think it would make more sense if the fastest lap point was awarded to the driver who finished in the points with the fastest lap

Except it would not be the race's fastest lap if a driver (or more than one) finishing outside the top ten posts faster laps.

Should not a driver who has been in the points places for most of the race and posts the fastest lap but then loses places due to mechanical reasons or a puncture and finishes out of the points not receive his due reward of a point for his efforts?
This could happen to more than one driver thus rewarding maybe the fourth or fifth fastest lap achiever an extra point.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Greem

2. Inverse finishing position, highest aggregate score is the champion

Both of them reward finishes, and both reward consistency, but I can't help thinking that both of them may have some perverse incentives hiding in them.

The immediate thought that comes to mind with option 2 is cars dropping out to lower the winners' score.

The situation - 10 laps to go, Verstappen is leading and Piastri is in 17th.
Verstappen is currently on target for 20 points.
Piastri retires - Verstappen's points drop to 19.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

The immediate thought that comes to mind with option 2 is cars dropping out to lower the winners' score.

The situation - 10 laps to go, Verstappen is leading and Piastri is in 17th.
Verstappen is currently on target for 20 points.
Piastri retires - Verstappen's points drop to 19.

But if based on the number of starters, no detriment.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Greem

But if based on the number of starters, no detriment.

In that case it would make no difference if you went for a 20-1 scoring system, or inverseed 1-20.

The initial 'loop hole' is if Verstappen is behind Ricciardo (for example) by any amount of places.

e.g. Ricciardo is in 12th, Verstappen is running 19th. Ricciardo retires for some reason, and Verstappen gains a place (and points).