Suggestions for fixing Monaco?

[larkim]

So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.

But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?

Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?

What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change requirement they'd still have to stop.

Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?

As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite the lack of overtaking opportunities?

I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just in case.

[geoff]

Post by larkim
So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.
But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?
Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?
What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change requirement they'd still have to stop.
Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?
As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite the lack of overtaking opportunities?
I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just in case.

Enough interesting stuff happened and nearly-happened through the field
to keep me, um, interested.

Less overtaking happened in Australia, so what's the excuse there ?

geoff

[Bigbird]

Post by geoff

Post by larkim
So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to
permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.
But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras
over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe
around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on
slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?
Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind
Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run
on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?
What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so
that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on
the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change
requirement they'd still have to stop.
Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper
combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?
As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one
circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite
the lack of overtaking opportunities?
I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I
watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping
something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that
as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just
in case.

Enough interesting stuff happened and nearly-happened through the
field to keep me, um, interested.
Less overtaking happened in Australia, so what's the excuse there ?

It's not about overtaking, never has been. It's about do or die, hero
or zero balls out scuffing the barriers racing.

Attempting to make it about overtaking is missing the point.

[larkim]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[Naked Fame]

Post by larkim
Given we can't remove the track position advantage (without changing the
nature of the track) and a safe pitlane is desired by all, I'd have thought
that the correct thing to do would be to mandate higher numbers of tyre
changes *just for this track* to mix things up a little.

How about sprinklers, just for this track?

I'll help myself out.

[larkim]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[Brian W Lawrence]

Post by larkim
So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.
But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?
Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?
What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change requirement they'd still have to stop.
Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?
As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite the lack of overtaking opportunities?
I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just in case.

A curious fact - RIC was hampered by the loss of K for much of the race,
and everyone else was unable to overtake. And yet, Daniel's race
average speed was 151.750 kph, which is the highest race average since
Button won in 2009 (155.166). And, in fact, it was only the 4th win
above 150 kph ever - the other two were Alonso (2007 & 2006). Alonso's
2006 win was at 150.707, slower than the 2017 average.

[larkim]

Post by Brian W Lawrence

Post by larkim
So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.
But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?
Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?
What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change requirement they'd still have to stop.
Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?
As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite the lack of overtaking opportunities?
I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just in case.

A curious fact - RIC was hampered by the loss of K for much of the race,
and everyone else was unable to overtake. And yet, Daniel's race
average speed was 151.750 kph, which is the highest race average since
Button won in 2009 (155.166). And, in fact, it was only the 4th win
above 150 kph ever - the other two were Alonso (2007 & 2006). Alonso's
2006 win was at 150.707, slower than the 2017 average.

That doesn't surprise me at all, it was clear that for much of the lap
RIC wasn't hampered much (if at all) as Vettel would often drop back
significantly before gaining on the climb up to the Casino.

Are those average mph figures affected by SC deployments etc?

[Brian W Lawrence]

Post by larkim

Post by Brian W Lawrence

Post by larkim
So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.
But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?
Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?
What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change requirement they'd still have to stop.
Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?
As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite the lack of overtaking opportunities?
I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just in case.

A curious fact - RIC was hampered by the loss of K for much of the race,
and everyone else was unable to overtake. And yet, Daniel's race
average speed was 151.750 kph, which is the highest race average since
Button won in 2009 (155.166). And, in fact, it was only the 4th win
above 150 kph ever - the other two were Alonso (2007 & 2006). Alonso's
2006 win was at 150.707, slower than the 2017 average.

That doesn't surprise me at all, it was clear that for much of the lap
RIC wasn't hampered much (if at all) as Vettel would often drop back
significantly before gaining on the climb up to the Casino.
Are those average mph figures affected by SC deployments etc?

Yes, it's distance covered divided by time - for Ricciardo 260.286km in
102m 54.807s. Round those to 260km & 103m, 260/103 = 2.524km/min or
151.456 km/h.

As an afterthought I checked the full race classification, which has the
average race speed for all drivers. I was surprised to find that only 5
drivers failed to average more than 150kph:

MAG 13th 149.933
VAN 14th 149.799 (for 77 laps)
GRO 15th 149.074 "
SIR 16th 148.562 "
STR 17th 147.080 76

Leclerc, Hartley & Alonso were all above 150 kph.

In 2009 16 drivers were above 150, only 4 were not, but all DNFd quite
early in the race.

Maybe that was true for 2005 & 2006 too, but I don't have the data. I
could do the math to find out, but ....

[John]

Don't "fix" it.

[Bruce Hoult]

Post by larkim
So the diagnosis of Sunday was that the tyres were too fragile to permit flat out running for large proportions of the race.
But presumably also the lap time advantage of the hypers and ultras over the soft were so significant that it was better to tip toe around on fragile but fast tyres than it was to run at the limit on slower tyres, if I've understood things satisfactorily?
Bottas seemed to be able to run fast enough on the softs behind Kimi, so presumably any of the top drivers could have chosen to run on the softs with no penalty compared to the ultras?
What could be done to make it more interesting? Harder tyres so that even if they didn't degrade much we'd at least have them on the limit as drivers, and with the mandatory tyre change requirement they'd still have to stop.
Or what about a menu choice - 2 stops if using an ultra / hyper combination, 1 stop if using a medium / soft combination?
As Monaco is "different", why not have different rules for this one circuit to facilitate at least some potential for action, despite the lack of overtaking opportunities?
I know drivers like Hamilton complained that it was boring, but I watched in the same way that I always watch Monaco, hoping something interesting would happen but sufficiently satisfied that as its a one off race I'm prepared to sit through some boredom just in case.

It doesn't need fixing.

If all the F1 tracks were the same, you might as well hold all the races at the same track.