Standing starts are a terrible idea introduced for the sole purpose of entertainment.

They hope that on cold used tyres the restart will be more exciting for the TV audience. I envisage that the stewards will pull out the SC at every single opportunity. Probably every 15 minutes to suit the ad breaks.

Us fans have no say in the matter. Double points for the last race was a daft idea that no one was in favour of and yet they still forced it upon us.

I despair.

The teams agreed to this as well. I personally like the idea as restarts behind the safety car gives the lead car too much ofan advantage

Buds at Mclaren, why do you say that MA? Do you think they have any influence over CW, and on what basis? Is there any evidence to prove it?
I agree with MUDD with regard advantage for leader under SC. (I thought NR was a little bit close to exceeding the maximum distance to SC @ British GP btw).
However I also agree standing starts potentially more dangerous.
But it is a dangerous sport, and if we think standing starts are too dangerous, why not start every race under SC.

Exactly mate and I may be wrong but I do not remember any incident at the start of a race this season apart from Kimi.

Can anyone refresh my memory? I like the idea and the challenge it throws up.

Never knew McLaren had so much influence at Ferrari International Assistance

Very much against this, why can't we just let drivers race rather than just influencing the result to try and make things happen.

I think it's perfectly fair that the lead car has an advantage at a restart since unless P2 was directly behind he will have lost some sort of advantage in the first place.

Step by step F1 is losing its fanbase and losing its value, Bernie is getting what he wants, F1 back on the cheap. Those shortcuts and sprinklers are just around the corner!

All the teams agreed to this, boullier, wolff, horner et alwere interviewed and confirmed the same. They'll see how it works and decide whether to stick with it.

The only race where I see it being a problem is Monaco and to be honest, we need to get rid of that race as it is not a race but a procession

Sorry but i gotta agree with martial.to me its a horrible idea.hate it.not fair and wil b open to corrupting races...the lead driver deserves the lead they achieved. Imagine this..hamilton and alonso battlin it out for chamionship..hamilton is out in front... over 1min ahead of anyone else on track...cue the no2 driver at ferrari to bin it and bring out the safety car and not only could the race then b a farce but the entire championship..the only way i see this being remotely fair is if they do the start with the necessary drivers startin with some sort of gap in relation to the gap they had wen pace car came in...it cld also corrupt the sport as stewards and race officials are not completely unbiased and cld pull a saftey car out wen its not needed to help a certain driver or team...worse idea than double points imo

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 11 hours, 36 minutes ago
All the teams agreed to this, boullier, wolff, horner et alwere interviewed and confirmed the same. They'll see how it works and decide whether to stick with it.

The only race where I see it being a problem is Monaco and to be honest, we need to get rid of that race as it is not a race but a procession
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i here what you are saying manx and did read that the team principles had no problems with it -- then again they can only see the potential advantage of there drivers making up places that would not have been possible with the customary rolling start -

however from what i gather the drivers are very much against it on a number of levels mainly safety - ( see link )

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114752

we have all seen some absolutely horrendous pile ups from the green light standing starts where it is only sheer luck that there were no fatalities , is it really worth risking those kind of accidents more than is absolutely necessary for the sake of enhancing the viewer statistics --

comment by go-cellino-go (U6730)
posted 20 hours, 52 minutes ago
Buds at Mclaren, why do you say that MA? Do you think they have any influence over CW, and on what basis? Is there any evidence to prove it?
I agree with MUDD with regard advantage for leader under SC. (I thought NR was a little bit close to exceeding the maximum distance to SC @ British GP btw).
However I also agree standing starts potentially more dangerous.
But it is a dangerous sport, and if we think standing starts are too dangerous, why not start every race under SC.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

you hit the nail on the head go cell -- the one standing start at the green lights is very dangerous as we have seen on occasion -
--- the significant point is why have more of them than is absolutely necessary as eventually the law of averages would logically dictate that the more standing starts you have the more chance of carnage there is -

I ask again, apart from Silverstone, has there been any incident at the start of a race this year?

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 13 minutes ago
I ask again, apart from Silverstone, has there been any incident at the start of a race this year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you are missing the wider issue manx , it is not just about what may or may not happen this year it is what potentially may happen in the seasons that follow as well with more standing starts than is absolutely necessary -

do we really want a situation where there are more chances of this kind of carnage and near fatalities happening -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-agfTgUVKw

Holy amazeballs I agree with martial to some degree!

To be honest the safety issue isn't an issue for me tho, u may say it was luck that nobody has died, I would argue wonderful car design, helmet design etc have mitigated that.

For me, its not really broken, so why try and fix it. Also for me, any drop in viewing figures for f1 has nothing to do with the driving, it's more to do with the drama, the heroes, the villains, the professors, the old maestros, the the young pretender. Driver personality isn't Hollywood enough for me. Corporate robots

comment by BWFCCLEGG (U7583)
posted 7 minutes ago
Holy amazeballs I agree with martial to some degree!

To be honest the safety issue isn't an issue for me tho, u may say it was luck that nobody has died, I would argue wonderful car design, helmet design etc have mitigated that.

For me, its not really broken, so why try and fix it. Also for me, any drop in viewing figures for f1 has nothing to do with the driving, it's more to do with the drama, the heroes, the villains, the professors, the old maestros, the the young pretender. Driver personality isn't Hollywood enough for me. Corporate robots
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yeh fully agree car design has come on alot from the 70s death traps , maybe i am little philosophical about it but i have seen some sickening standing start mass pile ups over the yrs and i really believe it is only a matter of time before we see another really big one the more standing starts we have -

alonso was inches from certain death at spa 2012 which really bought it home to me how dangerous standing starts are and i really think charlie whiting needs to look at his position in F1 after he is implementing multiple standing starts every race -

Before you know it, Bernie will have a reverse field. Give points for grid positions then pole starts from the back thus making the best fight through the pack. He almost got that at Silverstone and look what happened there. Would Kimi have been pushing quite so hard if he hadn't been so far down the grid?

MA, you missed part of my first reply. You said something about "pals at Mclaren". Can you explain that please? I was not aware of any close relationship between Mclaren and the FIA, in fact quite the opposite.

Martial I think people are jumping the gun and worrying about what could potentially happen rather than what actually happens.

I see nothing wrong with the idea and is better than starting behind the safety car

The world's full of what ifs, I mean, what if u trip up on a kerb and crack ur skull n die, life has its dangers n I think f1 goes over and beyond what is strictly necessary. I think they do a wonderful job of keeping the drivers safe, without making it too sanitised. But fear any further decisions made on a pure safety basis will over sanitize the sport. I mean at the end of the day they could be driving round in 1 litre diesels in carbon honeycomb spheres, or doing it virtually on a computer, but it wudnt be the same. You feel most alive when ur closest to death. And it's the empathy that we feel as fans that makes it enjoyable

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 9 hours, 53 minutes ago
Martial I think people are jumping the gun and worrying about what could potentially happen rather than what actually happens.

I see nothing wrong with the idea and is better than starting behind the safety car
----------------------------------------------------------------------

yeh i here what you are saying manx , i just doubt the wisdom of replicating the most singular dangerous part of any race several times over in the same race --

comment by go-cellino-go (U6730)
posted 14 hours, 15 minutes ago
MA, you missed part of my first reply. You said something about "pals at Mclaren". Can you explain that please? I was not aware of any close relationship between Mclaren and the FIA, in fact quite the opposite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i would not take my topics to literally go cell , no sinister agenda intended when i referred to CW and his buds at mclaren -
believe the new standing start rule was cooked up by obviously CW and somebody from mclaren between them --

Standing restart proposal came from McLaren – Whiting

"I was talking to someone at McLaren and we came up with this idea how to make the show a bit better. When you watch a race, what is the most exciting part of the race? The start. So, why not have a second one? It makes sense."

http://www.espn.co.uk/fia/motorsport/story/167109.html

McLaren is to blame, haha

TY WTCBU, that was all I wanted, just the link to where it was said. I hadn't heard that and was just wondering why MA had said it.
MA I wasn't trying to suggest you had a hidden agenda, just my inquisitive mind.
I wonder who at Mclaren, RD, EB, JB, KM or one of the race engineers?

As for the topic itself, I can't decide. The start is one of the exciting parts, I hate to miss it. Yet I agree it is potentially one of the most dangerous phases of the sport. Now this next bit is going to sound controversial but it is just a thought so bear with it....
How many people who watch F1 only watch it to see an accident. I have heard plenty say, "it's boring and only interesting when there is an accident".
Humans tend to have a morbid sense of curiosity, otherwise why does traffic on the motorway slow down to a crawl when there is an accident on the opposite carriageway. People rubber-necking to see what happened.
Nobody here likes to see anybody hurt at an F1 or any race event, but starting behind the SC is a bit boring, but as others have stated it tends to preserve the status quo in that the leader still tends to lead after the restart. Just brings the rest of the field closer, and possibly creates more excitement in the middle of the pack.
One other thing ALL restarts would do, static or SC, it gives the leader clean air for a number of laps. He had possibly already had to negotiate back markers, these had been released to the back of the grid, but the leader has to make up something like a minute or more before having to re-pass them. Something like six laps without having to worry about slower cars impeding their progress.

Nobody here Thursday then?