Do You Think No Refueling Will Add To F1??

[kkuk 0]

Do you think no refueling will help F1??

I think if the kept kers it would have made it alot like the 80's when they had turbo's and no refueling.

[yurp 0]

no

[Kati 0]

no [2]

[Argento Reloaded 1]

We will se more clever drivers win. Those drivers with the finnesse to adapt their driving style to the changing conditions of the car will have and edge over the rest.

[Medilloni 6]

Yes.

[yurp 0]

We will se more clever drivers win. Those drivers with the finnesse to adapt their driving style to the changing conditions of the car will have and edge over the rest.

Sorry - I know we've had this conversation before, but (though I really would like you to be right) I think you're wrong. Cars, tracks and drivers have changed a lot since the early days. Car reliability is far more important than a driver's ability to change driving style. Fuel efficiency will be more important then drivers adjusting to weight.

Yes - all round drivers will have the edge over guys who go fast, but those who can go fast for 70 laps will still beat those who can't and more importantly, guys with good cars will still beat those without (even if they know how to get the best out of a full tank).

Sorry to burst your bubble, but all we'll see is more pole to finish wins, more cautious early laps, more mistakes in heavy cars, less strategy to mix things up, less overtaking, more dull racing.

EDIT - oh yes - and slower race times, fastest laps only at the end of the race, processional races, final standings decided after qually.

Personally I would still prefer for F1 to be about fewer restrictions (max size of car, max number of wheels for weekend and safety measures only) and winning races by being the fastest around 70 laps. If refuelling lets you complete the race faster, then why on earth disallow it?

It was reintroduced to spice up the boring races and now it's being rebanned to spice things up too - stupidity.

EDIT EDIT - when a few drivers crash out in the first few laps of next year's first few GP's people will be saying, 'Yay, no refuelling is spicing things up!' Until they all get used to it and things return to normal. It's a silly change, built on a silly premise, with silly motives.

[Schumikonen 2]

I think driver will generally be more cautious and will attack less because they will be trying to save the tire and conserve fuel to make it to the end, probably ww will see more action at the end of the race when drivers are sure they will have fuel to spare and tire to attack, so I don't think refueling ban will add to racing.

[wapi 4]

Official reasons for refuelling ban is to save cost of shipping fuel rigs and few people to operate them. Which is ridiculous when you have in mind that its size is size of two drinks refrigerators they will ship anyhow as equipment for motorhome! But they had to throw some bone to Max.

Without refueling there is much more flexibility in tyre strategies, so tyre change to worse option can, and most likely will, happen as late as possible.

[mikathegreat2 2]

no [2]

No +3

[Argento Reloaded 1]

Sorry - I know we've had this conversation before, but (though I really would like you to be right) I think you're wrong. Cars, tracks and drivers have changed a lot since the early days. Car reliability is far more important than a driver's ability to change driving style. Fuel efficiency will be more important then drivers adjusting to weight.

Yes - all round drivers will have the edge over guys who go fast, but those who can go fast for 70 laps will still beat those who can't and more importantly, guys with good cars will still beat those without (even if they know how to get the best out of a full tank).

Sorry to burst your bubble, but all we'll see is more pole to finish wins, more cautious early laps, more mistakes in heavy cars, less strategy to mix things up, less overtaking, more dull racing.

EDIT - oh yes - and slower race times, fastest laps only at the end of the race, processional races, final standings decided after qually.

Personally I would still prefer for F1 to be about fewer restrictions (max size of car, max number of wheels for weekend and safety measures only) and winning races by being the fastest around 70 laps. If refuelling lets you complete the race faster, then why on earth disallow it?

It was reintroduced to spice up the boring races and now it's being rebanned to spice things up too - stupidity.

EDIT EDIT - when a few drivers crash out in the first few laps of next year's first few GP's people will be saying, 'Yay, no refuelling is spicing things up!' Until they all get used to it and things return to normal. It's a silly change, built on a silly premise, with silly motives.

Let

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

It's a silly change, built on a silly premise, with silly motives.

Bollocks! TF!

If what you say is the case then most of the races pre mandatory refuelling would have been dire and I don't remember them being that way.

We'll see who has the greater skill to get the car through the race and I certainly remember the drivers who raced off at the start, burning lots of fuel in the process than had to slow down at the end, nursing their fuel and in so doing put them in the clutches of others who had played a more strategic game. Made for some very exciting racing.

[parabs 0]

no, the only thing it will do is give "Maure" something else to whine about.

[dribbler 6]

Not quite sure on the motives of this one. Seems like the flexibility to be clever with strategy or take advantage of safety car anomolies has been firmly shafted by erradicating re-fuelling, but hey, what the F*ck do I know? Might spruce up the show. I doubt it but it might just.

My view is the that the ones who are careful with tyres are already careful with tyres. F1 aint been about driving like a tw*t posessed for years. There has recently been a big element of tyre management anyway, so why dull the show by stopping people potentially get burned/drag hoses down the pitlane etc.

It's just like seeing what mice will do when you feed them pure lard for a week. They will still be mice, just fatter.

It's nothing like that but you see my point.

No, okay neither do I.

Just let them re-fuel for f*cks sake.

[monza gorilla 1]

Refuelling is for sports car racing. It should never have been introduced to F1. But doing away with it adds nothing except weight and expectations. And false hope. If you're going to ban something just make sure it's Hermann Tilke.

[lewisthegreat2 0]

Yes.

It will add a lot of extra fuel tank to F1.

I'm not sure what else it will add. I honestly don't have a guess. We'll see soon enough.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Do you think no refueling will help F1??

Help F1 do what? You need to define the problem you see before I'll give you an answer (that will give me time to find my magic 8-ball).

Refuelling is for sports car racing. It should never have been introduced to F1. But doing away with it adds nothing except weight and expectations. And false hope. If you're going to ban something just make sure it's Hermann Tilke.

You're right, of course, Russ. Changing the weights of the cars wont change the cars, or the racing. Currently, a light Force India will still lose against a heavy McLaren. A bigger change would be to introduce more difficult circuits where only the best drivers can race with a minimum of mistakes. Kill two birds with one stone there; you get a clear indication of who's the better driver and you get actual racing again. Oh, and sprinkle in a good dose of mechanical grip for flavor.

[yurp 0]

Bollocks! TF!

If what you say is the case then most of the races pre mandatory refuelling would have been dire and I don't remember them being that way.

We'll see who has the greater skill to get the car through the race and I certainly remember the drivers who raced off at the start, burning lots of fuel in the process than had to slow down at the end, nursing their fuel and in so doing put them in the clutches of others who had played a more strategic game. Made for some very exciting racing.

history through rose-tinted spectacles.

refuelling was reintroduced to make things more interesting. it worked for a while until everyone adjusted.

rebanning refueling will do the same - be a bit interesting for a while and then become boring again.

ignoring the initial adjustment period and the fun that ensues, I find strategy and races in general far more entertaining with refueling.

me = right

you = wrong

[maure 1]

No refueling? Ok. Makes no difference in the big picture.

no, the only thing it will do is give "Maure" something else to whine about.

Only six posts and you are already begging for my attention while trying to hump my leg...

The fun we are going to have.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

history through rose-tinted spectacles.

refuelling was reintroduced to make things more interesting. it worked for a while until everyone adjusted.

rebanning refueling will do the same - be a bit interesting for a while and then become boring again.

ignoring the initial adjustment period and the fun that ensues, I find strategy and races in general far more entertaining with refueling.

me = right

you = wrong

er actually I think we both agree

The point I was trying to make is that the races pre refuelling were no more or less interesting than now. You could argue for the reasons I gave before as well as the reasons that you gave that each has their own benefits. But, yes once the adjustment is over you are correct back to the same old, same old.

Where refuelling works is where someone tries a different strategy and this can make for excitement. Or when a team changes strategy mid race. Or when the car catches fire

Where it doesn't is where you get a bit of exciting racing mid race where cars are head to head and then you discover they are on different strategies and shortly after a pitstop one ends up in 2nd and the other in 15th.

Or when suddenly you discover the person who was leading suddenly is in 5th place and you think - how did that happen?

I've had too many of the latter experiences where at the end you go "oh" and its a bit of an anti-climax.

Oh yes, and I'm right

[dribbler 6]

Only six posts and you are already begging for my attention while trying to hump my leg...

The fun we are going to have.

Why? Do you have genitals in your leg? It sure would help all the randy Jack Russell's, I suppose.

[yurp 0]

Oh yes, and I'm right

only when you agree with TF1;)

[Schumikonen 2]

history through rose-tinted spectacles.

refuelling was reintroduced to make things more interesting. it worked for a while until everyone adjusted.

rebanning refueling will do the same - be a bit interesting for a while and then become boring again.

ignoring the initial adjustment period and the fun that ensues, I find strategy and races in general far more entertaining with refueling.

me = right

you = wrong

Ok this is what FIA should do, allow refueling for those from mid grid and back and no refueling for the first half of the grid, all that based on the order they finish the last race or the order they qualified or by alphabetical order or car number or mixed al the reason on a race by races basis until the point that nobody will now where is going to be in the next race, that will spice things up for sure.

[Schumikonen 2]

er actually I think we both agree

The point I was trying to make is that the races pre refuelling were no more or less interesting than now. You could argue for the reasons I gave before as well as the reasons that you gave that each has their own benefits. But, yes once the adjustment is over you are correct back to the same old, same old.

Where refuelling works is where someone tries a different strategy and this can make for excitement. Or when a team changes strategy mid race. Or when the car catches fire

Where it doesn't is where you get a bit of exciting racing mid race where cars are head to head and then you discover they are on different strategies and shortly after a pitstop one ends up in 2nd and the other in 15th.

Or when suddenly you discover the person who was leading suddenly is in 5th place and you think - how did that happen?

I've had too many of the latter experiences where at the end you go "oh" and its a bit of an anti-climax.

Oh yes, and I'm right

Actually Meanioni is right, so now I go back to my fisrt stance about Alonso being X

[Schumikonen 2]

I know that now cars will be slower at the beggining of the race and will go picking up speed but I don't have a clear idea if the races are going to longer or shorter now, I know pit stops will be shorter but just by 5 second in average so it is not much of an influence in how long the races will be now, anyway I think races will be longer now because cars will be near empty at the end of the race while they were near empty 3 times in a normal race.

Can someone of you tell me someting about this?

EDIT: by longer I mean more time to complete the race, I know they will cover the same distance but how much time it will take to complete the race with refueling?

[Autumnpuma 0]

Ok this is what FIA should do, allow refueling for those from mid grid and back and no refueling for the first half of the grid, all that based on the order they finish the last race or the order they qualified or by alphabetical order or car number or mixed al the reason on a race by races basis until the point that nobody will now where is going to be in the next race, that will spice things up for sure.

I know that now cars will be slower at the beggining of the race and will go picking up speed but I don't have a clear idea if the races are going to longer or shorter now, I know pit stops will be shorter but just by 5 second in average so it is not much of an influence in how long the races will be now, anyway I think races will be longer now because cars will be near empty at the end of the race while they were near empty 3 times in a normal race.

Can someone of you tell me someting about this?

I need a map to figure this one out.