Do you agree with Safety-Car starting races? (Spa 2000...)

Jordi · 6 Jul 2002, 10:53 (Ref:328098)

I don't agree.. It robs a lot of the excitement of the starts, and it wasn't as wet anyway (Spa 1997, 2000)

Of course, they didn't use it at Spa'98, and we know what happened, but damn, that was more exciting!

Anyway, lately it seems that it never rains in F1 races...

**Asp** · 6 Jul 2002, 11:22 (Ref:328105)

Where it is so wet it is too dangerous of course, but...

1) It wasn't too wet at Spa 2000 as you said, and that was just paranoid drivers and proven as the SC pulled in after one lap
2) Is it safer? - they'll be going into the first corner faster, therefore if there is any minor accident it is likely to be a lot worse, I assume at least

NiceGuyEddie · 6 Jul 2002, 11:32 (Ref:328110)

It takes away alot of excitement. Basically they are all big boys (yes, even Kimi fits the definition in this context) and they all know how to operate a Formula 1 racingcar.

And the threat of danger plus the speed, is what makes the sport interesting anyway.

bart_jacobs · 6 Jul 2002, 11:57 (Ref:328118)

I was there at Spa 2000 and i was robed of a beautiful start!!!good thing there was this nice overtaking move of Hakkinen

6 Jul 2002, 12:20 (Ref:328126)

IMO rolling starts don't require the skill of a standing start although it can be said that some skill has been taken out due to launch control. I agree with others that rolling starts aren't as exciting.

I think if the weather conditions are bad enough to warrant it, ok, but from memory Spa 2000 wasn't bad enough, we've seen races start in much worse conditions.

Jack racer · 6 Jul 2002, 12:43 (Ref:328140)

Thats not racing. If the drivers can't be sensible enuff to start a wet race they shouldn't have a super licence

Kex · 6 Jul 2002, 12:50 (Ref:328143)

No I don't agree with safety car starting races.

They're supposed to be the best racing drivers in the world and should be able to handle a few puddles.

Miss Hardt · 6 Jul 2002, 12:59 (Ref:328147)

I think they can be good if everything's safe....maybe on some fast track...it would be great if Monza didn't have those chicanes...and if they were starting from the longest straight...so, no way.

Jordi · 6 Jul 2002, 18:08 (Ref:328276)

Also, with the safety car leading the field, it eliminates all the passing in the starts, as the field is much more spread out...

People raced at the Nordschleife in the 60's under rain and fog, didn't they?

Yoong Montoya · 6 Jul 2002, 23:34 (Ref:328388)

I think safety car starts are less exciting, but I also hate seeing half the field disappearing at the first corner, even if it does help Minardi finish in the points! I don't want to see a race being run by backmarkers.

f1manoz · 7 Jul 2002, 02:39 (Ref:328450)

Don't agree with safety car starts. I understant that sometimes it's might be dangerous, but egad, they are the best drivers in the world and shouldn't be causing accidents in the first place!!

Valve Bounce · 7 Jul 2002, 02:59 (Ref:328454)

I think we have been through this topic before, probably even had a poll, and the general consensus was that the present starting system is by far the best and most popular choice with forum members. There was geat discussion about this. Sure there are other ways of starting to make it safer, less likely to have a prang, but most agreed that in the present conditions of F1 where overtaking is difficult, the current system of starts affords a great opportunity for cars inproving on their grid positions after the start. I wouldn't want any change.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

BootsOntheSide · 7 Jul 2002, 10:33 (Ref:328558)

Of course CART's rolling starts are exciting, but in that the cars run 2 by 2 with lots of close action, and if the field isn't properly aligned the start doesn't happen. That is exciting but less so than standing starts.

Standing starts are always the most exciting moment, the sight and sound of the engines roaring, 88 (well 84 today) tyres squealing into life, trying to spot the good and bad starts is the greatest spectacle in any sport. Launch control reduces the spectacle and the competitive edge for the driver (I remember when it was first introduced Irvine commented that 'some guy in the factory made a great start', summing up what a pain ti is for a real racer to lose the thrill of a manual start), but its still awesome, and the rolling start brigade are in my mind misguided.

For very wet races its an option but not the right one, most driver injuries and fatalities over the year have been 2 car crashes at the most.

Number Juan · 7 Jul 2002, 10:36 (Ref:328561)

its a test of a driver not to crash or nerf anyone in the wet, however you must consider that we dont want to see horrific crashes in the wet and drivers getting hurt. i must say that spa 98', the only race i saw from the start - ws both exhilarating and worrying thinking someone must have died. everybody was very lucky to get away with the pile up. its an open ended question with complicated answers and arguments.

Jordi · 7 Jul 2002, 11:29 (Ref:328601)

In Spa 1998 maybe it was necessary, but from then people was just scared and in 2000 it was just wet...

I hope it rains in a race someday, and they don't start under the safety car

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why wasn't the safety car used for starting Spa 98 does anyone know?	Yoong Montoya	Formula One	5	5 Aug 2002 03:25
Are you agree with BMW-Williams ?	Speed	Formula One	1	26 Jan 2001 08:48
Group C sportscar races in 2000	Truckosaurus	Historic Racing Today	5	12 Jan 2000 09:20