Penalties galore and a Safety Car that wrecked the race? | Italian GP Talking Points

Penalties galore and a Safety Car that wrecked the race? | Italian GP Talking Points
Today we're going to focus once again on engine penalties and ask if there are better alternatives. We also cover why the late-race Safety Car at Monzo wasn't as bad as people make out.
#Formula1 #ItalianGP
------------------
Patreon: / chainbearf1
Twitter: / chainbear
Music: "Chess Moves" by Telegrams
open.spotify.com/artist/0grDI...

[@austingonzalez1148]

Mixing up the grid leads to more interesting races. Penalties are fine, a known quantity, and part of the engineering challenge for the constructors' strategies

[@jontosh]

Mixing up the grid still led to a really boring Monza race. It doesn't always lead to more exciting races and as CB says, the teams are starting to game the system with when and how they take PU penalties. I like the suggestion of penalties being taken in the pits. Also like the idea proposed for SC's in the last segment of the race.

[@kevinbailey3239]

@@jontosh race direction barely showed Sainz's charge at Monza. Throw in that midfield cars don't battle front runners (unless its alonso and hamilton) and there's very little added excitement.

[@phil1119]

I’d argue that taking penalty in your pitstops still mixes up the grid and might add a strategical depth to penaties, seems like a cool idea to me

[@DjDolHaus86]

It leads to a more interesting race in theory, in reality the mid table cars just get out of the way of those charging from the back because there is no point in wasting time fighting them

[@fallenshallrise]

Mixing up the grid with 12 independent teams would be exciting. The problem isn't the grid order, it's all the B-teams that don't get funding and play a strategy of pulling over for their daddies instead of fighting for every point. When Minardi or Jordan or Sauber or the real Williams started further up the grid than expected they wouldn't just ghost out of the way every time a Red Bull or Mercedes or Ferrari came up behind them.

[@justinbocchino5141]

the grid penalties almost feel like they're a realization of the "reverse grid order" proposition. The cars that push themselves the hardest end up using more parts and ending up in the back. definitely makes the race more interesting I think

[@Atty1997]

excuse me good sir, I couldn’t help but notice that your last name is literally "blowjob" in Italian

[@Strait_Raider]

Everyone seems to enjoy these big last-to-first, last-to-podium, last-to-points performances when superior cars and drivers start from farther down the grid (And I wonder what % of overtakes can be directly attributed to them). From a spectacle point of view they'd be silly to get rid of them. Time penalties applied at the end of the race generate very little excitement and add confusion for viewers. Imagine if there were 9 different time penalties across the grid for people to try to sort out who was actually winning, and which gaps between drivers were actually battles for position.

[@ukkiesc5087]

@@Strait_Raider The suggestion wasn't to give them time penalties served at the end of the race, chainbear's suggestion was to give them timepenalties to be served during the first pit stop. This could also make it quite interesting, but it could also make it easier to crash into your direct competitor

[@PeterTeal77]

Does it make the race more interesting? Spa and Monza didn't exactly light the world on fire.

[@justinbocchino5141]

@@PeterTeal77 The whole idea of reverse grid order was to give the cars that usually run toward the back a fairer chance. The fact that the best teams now have to maneuver their way up the places is probably a little bit more fun than them staying in the front the entire time

[@GuidoHaverkort]

9:50 THANK YOU for saying rolling restart. So many people want a standing start but that's even more unfair than ending under safety car

[@KreskizKi]

Yes, but that point about banning tyre changes is not a great idea really. How would it be fair for two cars on two different strategies, eg. one 10 seconds in front with old tyres vs someone back with new, to be put back to back? They should be allowed to change tires for the chances to equal out, since the time differences, which their strategies worked for, are neutralised.

[@caswelllawrence1651]

@@KreskizKi you are 100% correct. Also standing start would put some drivers on the now extremely dirty side. Red flag, change tyres, roling start. Only way to go

[@GuidoHaverkort]

@@KreskizKi true but that's 50/50. Allowing changes would maybe not be fair to the car behind because maybe they gave up track position to pit for softer tyres

[@ramakrushnadash137]

@@GuidoHaverkort But thats what happens in normal safety car. Why should it be different for a late safety car? Agree they lose the tyre advantage, but they gain back the time disadvantage.

[@xt4hodgson]

​@@ramakrushnadash137 This might get complicated but they could note the time gaps between cars or at the end of the last lap when the red flag was called then allow a tyre change in exchange for whatever the average total pit time is for that race. So if it takes 20 seconds to go through the pit and the average stop is 2.5 seconds you could exchange that 22.5 seconds for new tyres and your position would be adjusted for the restart. if you're 23 seconds ahead of the nearest car no change, if that time would have dropped you back 2 places you let 2 cars pass you on the new formation lap. I assume rolling start would be once round under the safety car and then normal withdrawl as if the race hadn't been stopped. Could maybe round the time down a bit as safety car stops aren't usually as costly.

[@Ausknutz]

I agree 100% with your video. Rules were followed at Monza and the only discussion is whether the rules should be changed or not. In my view SC finishes are so rare that I wouldn't bother to change the rules.

[@RoyMatzem]

If we add F2 and F3 that situation become very common, also i think that "when" is more important than "how often", if happens in title decider race again, decisions must clear, but also entertainment, 5 laps following SC is the most boring way of ending a championship, so i defintly think in a way of changing, and the "specialredflag" that chainbear propose is very good

[@Ausknutz]

@@RoyMatzem F2 and F3 have their own rules that are much different from F1, for example they are spec car series. The "special red flag" rule that Chainbear proposed is good, I think it would like a SC without lap count.

[@BiggieTrismegistus]

@@Ausknutz I agree that there's no reason to bother changing it, but if they do ChainBear suggestion isn't a bad start. The one thing I would add to his idea is that the red flag isn't just dependent on the number of laps left but also on how big the gap between first and second is. Verstappen's lead of 17 seconds was insurmountable so even a rolling restart isn't fair to him. If, however, Leclerc had been within DRS range when the safety car came out that would have been entirely different. You could argue that the race finishing under yellow wouldn't be fair to him. Indycar red flagged the Indy 500 this year with 5 laps left after a late caution came out. It wasn't controversial at all and the fans is the stands literally applauded the decision. I think the reason for that is that while Marcus Ericsson was in the lead and would go on to win the race, his lead at the time of the red flag was easily surmountable within the laps remaining. If he'd been half a lap ahead I think they would have (and should have) let the race finish under yellow. As it was they came back out and ran three laps behind the pace car so the drivers could get everything warmed up on the car and then had a two lap shootout. I know Indycar isn't F1 (during Indycar red flags no one is allowed to touch the cars and there's no mandatory 10 minute countdown for example) but I think this year's 500 was a great example of using the red flag for entertainment purposes while still maintaining sporting integrity.

[@Sportfuck]

@@BiggieTrismegistus you are wrong. Winning a race isnt the only variable. There are other teams ad well.

[@catchnkill]

@@BiggieTrismegistus It is easy to make it fair. But F1 does not want to. They want entertainment. They want controversy. If they want to be fair, adopt the current FormulaE method. At the end of the race, the time gap at the Safety Car come out time will be added to the final race time. Say the P2 car is 17 sec behind P1 when safety car comes out. P2 car will add 17 sec to the race time to arrive at the final race time. The time gap is perserved. This way no car gain any advantage under Safety Car. All the time difference is the result of racing.

[@ey7290]

A red flag should only be used if the crash barrier needs repairing, a crash is serious enough that you need doctors on the track or if the weather conditions are unsafe. Neither Abu Dhabi nor Monza ticked any of these boxes. Red flags are instruments of safety, not entertainment

[@thepack6952]

Wouldn't a tractor be a question of safety? We have seen them take a life before.

[@vycanismelodis]

maybe that should be changed then

[@ey7290]

@@thepack6952 We've seen someone crash into a tractor under yellow flags, well officially yellow flags, some marshals before Dunlop were waving green flags. Since then it became mandatory if a recovery vehicle is on track at the bare minimum there needs to be a VSC, but 99% of the time its a full SC, and guess what. No F1 fatalities have happened since then

[@Juanguar]

@@thepack6952 wasn’t the tractor in this case behind the barrier not on track ?

[@BrandoN-ie1np]

@@Juanguar Nah the tractor was on track last weekend...

[@nathang4682]

Not a bad idea on the penalties but at least as far as it being confusing there is 0 confusion when the lights go out. Following tyre strategies gets confusing enough during the race, trying to keep track of who has penalties would make races that much more confusing. But I guess if it is a really big deterrent then maybe it wouldn't happen that often

[@ShimmeringSpectrum]

They should update the graphics package to include any penalties a driver has to serve at the next stop. It's what the F1 game does and how most racing sims do it. Having a "+5" graphic next to a driver's time would save us the effort of remembering who has what penalties, whatever the penalties are for.

[@MCoTEDDY]

I agree this solution would take away all the bad things he listed about qualifying with penalties and just put them on the race instead. Which is way worse imo. This would actively ruin the race on Sunday. It might be more "fair" but sounds horrible for the sport.

[@anameyoucantremember]

Considering nowadays Crofty can barely remember who drives what, poor lad gonna be sweating bullets trying to figure out who's doing what and when and why 🤣

[@ollyclass]

A point on red flags is I wish they'd make like situations that require definite red flags. If a car is going over 150 mph into a barrier of course it's gonna be a red flag to fix it but it's taken them so long to decide. And I still don't like there being a JCB on track with racing cars.

[@richardp3159]

I'd though after Bianchi's crash they were going to red flag if service vehicles needed to enter the track, clearly this doesn't happen in dry conditions but maybe in the wet?

[@Trendyflute]

A JCB on track with cars moving is a risk but it's not the same risk in every situation. Suzuka 2014 was blatantly way, way more dangerous than Monza 2022 given the weather, light conditions, grip conditions, visibility conditions, and the fact that the recovery was outside of a corner instead of 'inside' a straight. Suzuka 2014 should've been red flagged before Sutil even crashed, and definitely should've been once he had. Ricciardo at Monza was a way, way safer and more manageable situation. A red flag at Monza would've been excessive. But the safety car should've come out faster and held up the leader instead of third place.

[@TheJokerit19]

Sometimes JCB on track is a definite necessity, like in Ricciardo's case since the car got stuck in gear, but SC is automaticity, so more or less zero risk.

[@f1multiviewer]

Part of the reason why penalties were confusing this time, is how they handled the "grid position penalty" and "back of grid" penalty types. 42.3c) of the FiA Formula One Sporting Regulations (issue 8) has a self-reference, which seems to be added in error. Those same "preconditions" are repeated in 42.3d), suggesting that they both are to be applied at the same time, but looking at previous revisions, one can assume that the self-reference was added by accident, and isn't supposed to be there. If you remove the erroneous reference, it would then require the "grid position penalties" to be applied separately of "back of grid" penalties, so the "gaps" created by removing penalised drivers would close up before, and Verstappen would've started 4th. The self-reference is still present in the latest regulations, and the regulations for 2023, and in my opinion, caused the confusion in how the regulations should be applied with regards to grid penalties.

[@fhz3062]

That's why I tell my students to seat down and write the code properly, creating testing scenarios and verifying results. At 2:40 , Chain Bear showed us exactly how to apply the algorithm correctly and clearly. What makes people confused is that people don't organize the problem and apply rules the way they think it should be, for example, +5 Verstappen, then back the grid to Sainz, then Perez... and so on and this would make Verstappen start at 4th, which clearly violates how the penalties are meant to work. Writing a problem with a non-natural programming language avoids many problems that appears when we try to use our natural languages without the needed rigorous to be clear and precise.

[@jkliao6486]

I think you are right, and assuming that is the case, it's actually funny considering how everyone is unhappy about handling the SC whereas nobody is talking about THIS big cock up by FIA where essentially they failed to follow their own rules AGAIN.

[@fredgoodyer4907]

I’m not nearly as familiar with the regs as you, but just based on what you’ve written about “back of the grid” being applied separately from “grid position” penalties, if the former were applied first, Max would have been 7th, and I think the rest would be as it really was too.

[@DaKobaa]

Okay, a few thnigs to say. 1) ive seen the sporting regs issue 7, and it seems like at 42.3c they reference 42.3c within it. I get the confusion with this, but note that there is no seperate back of the grid penalty. 28.3 states that "If a driver incurs a penalty exceeding fifteen (15) grid places he will be required to start the race from the back of the starting grid." But thats not a seperate penalty by itself, its still a grid position penalty, thus it gets regulated in 42.3c. 42.3d then arranges the poeple who start back of the grid, because otherwise that would not be regulated. It´d be foolish to assume that starting back of the grid would not be a grid position penalty. 2) You´re looking at the wrong sporting regs. Issue 7 is the old version, currently issue 8 is used, which came out 3 weeks after issue 7. In issue 8, 42.3c got changed, they removed the wrong reference. Thus, whats written in issue 7 is completely irrelevant. and if you talk about the reference refering to 42.3a and 42.3b, i do not get why they should be faulty. please explain it to me then why you would think that. EDIT: whoah, thank god i do not work in the law business, i looked at the wrong article. i looked at 41.3c and d where its correct, my bad, point 2 is irrelevant.

[@f1multiviewer]

@@DaKobaa issue 8 also contains the same self-references, and were the regulations that I based my opinions on, so it was merely a typo on my part. In issue 8, 42.3 (in its entirety) remained unchanged. In Article 42.3, it's made clear that "grid position penalties" and "back of the grid" penalties should be treated separately. They may have the same result (a drop in grid position), but their treatment in the regulations is separate.

[@PickledBeetroot2u]

A mandatory red flag near the end opens it up for abuse. "I'm going to park my car in the most awkward spot to cause a red flag so my team mate can start closer to the leader and stand a better chance of winning the race"...springs to mind. Oh and I like your idea for dishing out penalties. The current format means a driver doesn't always take their full penalties, e.g. Tsunoda just goes to the back. It doesn't even roll onto the next race.

[@BrandoN-ie1np]

We can prevent the abuse by mandatory red flag the race when there are 5 laps left so we can have a grandstand finish every race...

[@justinburley8659]

I mean, drivers and team can actually abuse the current rules if they wanted to by forcing a race to end under safety car like this. Let’s say that Lando was in the lead and Max was closing in. Then Ricciardo retires in a dangerous spot. Wouldn’t that also be cause for concern?

[@kivori3438]

Every situation is abusable so why not go for the abusable option that is most exciting? I’d prefer red flag

[@Mikhael03]

Mandatory red flag is like having a football match currently 3-0 and the ref deciding that penalty shootouts will determine the final result because a player got 'tripped' up

[@escalator9734]

@@Mikhael03 Yes a red flag or 1 lap left after safety car just make the entire race worthless. Ver had a 17s by racing perfectly, (having an op car), better strategy; and people actually want a red flag/ 1 lap race where people can get a cheap win ? wtf ?! On top of that I'd say if a race is red flagged after 90% or laps done, the race shouldn't even be restarted. The whole thing is crazy to me, people are crazy; wanting "entertainment" and cheap cliffhangers over a proper sporting competition. I can't understand what's wrong about finishing a race behind the safety car. I hate people so much.

[@StarTrekGeek47]

Regarding alternative solutions to the existing parts penalty system, how about simply "rolling over" any penalty past a certain point? If the drivers and teams are encouraged by the system to accrue 25 or 35 or 45 place grid penalties after they've already hit 15, knowing that they can't start beyond 20th position, why not split their penalty over the next two or three races? So instead of a 35 penalty being a "back of the grid" penalty, meaning it's effectively only a 15 place penalty, you instead make it a 15 place penalty same race, AND a ten place penalty in the race after, and a ten place penalty in the race after that. That way the motivations to bundle up penalties all at once are neutralized, and penalties better reflect how they should/would shake up on the grid for how severe they are.

[@ShimmeringSpectrum]

The downside is that drivers who are perpetual backmarkers would never be able to serve the penalties at all. For instance, how would you penalize Latifi, who on average is in the bottom two rows anyway? Would a 20 place grid penalty mean he's relegated to last place for the entire rest of the season? It also means that, in the last round, people can still get their penalties wiped free, since there aren't any rounds left to roll the penalty onto.

[@Shortyman17]

@@ShimmeringSpectrum the problems you've raised all exist in the current system if I'm not mistaken At lest that proposed system would get rid of one problem

[@joshuapinter]

This was wonderful. They should literally hire you to create animations like this for F1TV. Beautiful and simple. All makes logical sense. Not sure what the big complaints are from, besides maybe increasing the allowed PUs to account for the increased # of races in a season.

[@tayloreckert3123]

The visual for grid penalty reordering was brilliant!

[@stephenbritton9297]

Honestly, I like the Indycar engine penalty system. Instead of a set allotment then penalties, each engine must make a minimum number of miles (practice/quali/race), and changing one before its miles nets you a penalty. Not like F1, where you can take a new engine, but maybe use an old one again without a penalty. Also, manufacturer's points are awarded as bonus for any engine that runs the 500, then hits a certain number of miles before being swapped out.

[@andresmartinezramos7513]

I REALLY like the idea of of points being awarded to the constructors for making reliable pieces of equipent, and not just being the sum of the driver's points. It would make the constructors championship a lot more interesting.

[@Ceece20]

Honestly I really like that idea too, because it would fit with what F1 teams are seemingly already doing. Many of the front runners have taken penalties because they always switch out stuff early, because if everyone does it at the same time, penalties don’t matter.

[@danbradley7176]

That was a very helpful analysis and visual presentation, now I understand. Even if someone is not happy with the outcome, they can't fault the stewards this time as they followed the rules as written. I do like the idea of assigning time penalties but retaining the grid based on qualifying. There will be some uncertainty on how well everyone's race is really going until the first pit stops are completed.

[@user-gu3cp6sn3b]

The time penalty wouldn't really work, because of the gaps between performances of the cars are not like minutes as it used to be. For example, if the time for each part is too huge, and someone crashed their whole engine and gearbox, and end up taking a penalty like for a minute or even more for the next race, a lot of cars from midfield backwards won't be able to catch back up that big of a time and get into the points unless a safety car happens after they served their penalty in the pits. This will put them out of the race before the race even starts. However if the penalty for each part is too small, teams will just spread their parts change across races, changing only 1 for each race. Let's say 5 second for each component, 5 sec is like nothing for the faster teams, that means the top teams almost pays nothing for changing an engine.

[@peterfconley]

The way you think about the sport is so precise. I really appreciate the way you consider all the factors.

[@emanuelhirsch]

Wow, thank you Stuart for this crystal clear clarity about grid penalties!! Marvelous job . You are a great pedagogue ! Thank you...

[@ankitpareek7271]

I can't believe I understood your explanation of the race order. You're extremely good at explaining things. Thank you for the effort and care.

[@dlake1224]

I'm glad to finally see someone talk sensibly about this issue! These grid penalties have often occured at Spa and Monza for the last 10 or so years and we've coped fine. If anything they are implemented better now than they used to be (something about whoever submitted the paperwork first got the better position) Didn't they do you're penalty system back at the start of the most recent Mclaren-Honda era where McLaren ended up with 20s penalties for taking extra engines from the back of the grid? It seems fair but I remember there was a fair bit of outrage from the media

[@gigadonis8684]

Didn't Button get like a 105 place grid penalty or something?

[@cigmorfil4101]

@@gigadonis8684 Can't remember who, but it was commented at the time (tongue in cheek) that they should be starting in the next country.

[@dralol]

Red flag restart from pit lane with staggered release(according to race intervals, IE Verstappen 17s ahead of Leclair) and no tire/parts change any time you can't use VSC. Would love to hear the counter argument to this as I think it's pretty simple to implement and seems to be a lot more fair. And yeah, I really like the time penalty suggestion for illegal car parts replacement.

[@anttihelin6820]

Red flag restart from the grid but we use aggregate time so if Max was 17 s ahead before the red flag LeClerc needs to beat him by 17 s. We used aggregate time in the 90s for this and it was fi- wait, why are you taking all those rotten fruit out?

[@pyRoy6]

That's not a bad idea. I was thinking the automatic red flag + banning tyre changes could lead to other "fairness" issues if some cars have fresh tyres. Staggering the release takes care of that. Then again, there could be safety reasons for tyre changes, which could be taken care of with more rules...but now it's getting a bit complicated and less fun. Maybe the solution is to go the opposite direction and simplify. Red flag, but allow tyre changes as before. Does it seem gimicky? Maybe. But it's simple, and everyone would conceivably have the outcome of the race in their own hands (even if their previous advantage/disadvantage may have been reduced through luck).

[@debrishsarma3355]

IMO due to budget cap restrictions there shouldn't be any limits on parts. Teams are already limited monetary wise. They should be allowed to choose where they wanna spend their money and get penalized through the budget cap.

[@awesomefacematt]

I would love to see this once the budget cap affects powertrains cause it currently doesn’t

[@eNTiii90]

That actually makes sense

[@squelchedotter]

I still think it's desirable to have a part limit for sustainability reasons. If one team figures out that blowing through e.g. one battery every race is cheaper than building it strongly to last multiple races, is that really desirable? There are lots of small parts on a car that would probably be cheaper to replace than to build better, once teams start doing that it would cause a ton of waste and misdirect useful innovation.

[@dlake1224]

Most sports with spending restrictions struggle to actually punish teams for breaching them. I just see teams unfairly getting away with it

[@Snakke40]

If I recall correctly the engines themselves aren't under the budget cap at the moment, so for the current regulations this would just mean that Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull just would take a new engine to every race. And even if the engines *were* under the budget cap, the prices of them would need to somehow be homologationed , which would be somewhat possible. But considering how big an advantage a new engine is, we also would have to make those prices very high. Because instead of finding fun loopholes and gaining tenths by redesigning a sticky-uppy-bit, they'd just do new engines every race if that's the most bang for your buck. And then we're basically back to maximum allowed engine changes, but by an arbitrary dollar amount against the cost cap instead of penalties during the races themselves.

[@arrgghh1555]

The worst part of saftey cars is the wasted 2+ extra laps they spend out there allowing lapped cars past. Allow the lapped runners past asap and enforce a pitlane limiter speed limit in the mini sectors where the incident is.

[@AndreSomers]

Don’t allow them past at all, instead allow whomever is in front of the to overtake (and thus lap) them.

[@pasco71]

Quite often the large gap caused by all cars being bunched up behind the SC is used by marshals to clear the incident more quickly while no cars are nearby. If you have cars going round like under a VSC you don't get this big gap and make recovery harder and take longer, defeating the point of your suggestion.

[@AutisticWombot]

Love the intro music so much 😂 penalties are a little weird and they need to sort it out. Hate to see cars driving past a tractor that's busy reversing as well. A few things to take away from this weekend...

[@zxsw85]

Same! His music is bommmmb

[@darren806]

Yeah tbh I think a new rule that red flags always come out when a vehicle like that is on track would be the best outcome from the race. Also agree that the intro music is so good

[@robinmarin2]

I just love your videos and analysis! Thank you so much!

[@liangdar9675]

I feel like Chain Bears proposition for penalties favors the top teams while the current version favors the backmarker teams. If you're driving out in front by upwards of 20 seconds like verstappen often does currently swapping parts for a time penalty would not be to that bad while it would certainly hurt teams in the midfield or ruin the chances of an upset for a backmarker team, while losing 5 places on your gridslot would hurt someone like leclerc or verstappen a lot more than say latifi for example.

[@theredestbull]

My idea for late race safety car is this: if a safetycar is triggered after 85% of the race distance is completed (about last 50km) race control shows a yellow-red flag (as new creation) which means cars position themselves at the pit exit (like with red flag) but lapped cars can unlap before joining the pitlane - so cars are in order of race position. No tyrechange etc. only cooling of cars allowed + safety issues. Then resume race with rolling start after hazard is cleared.

[@fhz3062]

That's basically what Chain Bear described in the video, except for the completed percentage of the race. No tyre changing when stopping, but letting some -- one or two -- laps under the safety car before stopping seems to be the way to go. Rolling start instead of standing start is basically keeping the SC restart procedure, but with a brief break between. I'd only change the color of the proposed flag to purple, since a yellow-red striped flag is already in use, and I like purple. ;)

[@BiggieTrismegistus]

Add to your plan that such a scenario only happens when the car in second is within a certain time (like 1.5 seconds or less) and I think it would work.

[@theredestbull]

@@fhz3062 in my imagination the yellow red flag would appear like the half-white-half-black flag, but with the colours

[@brahms113]

I'll add another con. Giving a 5 second penalty to any team below the top teams would ruin their race even more. Max, Charles, Carlos, Lewis and George would just drive off.

[@tompw3141]

What do you mean by "just drive off"??

[@JoQeZzZ]

Yes, it feels even more unfair/unbalanced than the current system and robs fans of a recovery drive come Sunday. I really love these penalty races. Even if Max is leading after 25% again, it's still very interesting across the grid.

[@Reydriel]

Bruh, no mention of Perez, lol

[@OnionChoppingNinja]

agreed. Looking at Verstappen's form these past 5 races. 5 second penalty would be nothing more then a minor inconvenience.

[@ratedr9544]

@@tompw3141 Look at Mercedes the past two years when they had time penalties, yeah that.

[@J5L5M6]

Wonderful video, 'Bear! Thank you!

[@Bryan2799]

Solid video as always! Thanks again!

[@CYMotorsport]

My only objection here 5:16 is SR 29.2 c) mandates a 5 place grid drop EACH subsequent instance for gearboxes. And 28.3 adds an additional 5 for each PU part (“[penalties]will be cumulative”) after the initial 10 place is given on the first breach. With everyone taking the massive penalties, the play is more about taking max positions at Monza with the hopes you don’t have to do anymore given they penalties are ongoing. Thus, while it may appear they are incentivized to just bolt on shiny stuff, they start a doomsday clock. The other which you didn’t comment on, and I think rightfully to be honest, is many ppl take issue with is some complained driver infringements penalties get washed in with technical so it may encourage poor decisions. Which is on the surface fair. But for example Yuki’s extra 3 grid position drop wasn’t washed away bc accompanied with were 2 penalty points. He’s now on 8. Dangerously close to a race ban. Additionally, Carlos impeded in qualifying which ppl thought would just be a moot point. Ironically, he was only reprimanded. But ppl often forget they regulation tucked away if a driver gets 5 reprimands in a season, so long as 4 are driver infringement as this was (DOC 47 Italy), you get a 10 place drop at the next event. He’s on 4 now so also in heavy danger despite only getting a reprimand and would have been true even in the instance he was given a grid drop.

[@keelanrose5706]

Your idea for power unit penalties is REALLY good!

[@Evan102030]

Many thoughts discussed here crossed my mind as well. And then I thought "Chainbear needs to do a video in this"

[@wazzzuuupkiwi]

The idea of a time penalty for engine parts instead of the grid places we have now, to me turns the race into exactly what you described with the championship points deduction option: a race that feels hollow, with an unclear amount of paperwork after the fact to determine the actual result. Not to mention that these last few races seeing the red bull, ferrari and even mercedes making up grid places by absolutely stomping on the other constructors really was both entertaining and eye-opening. Especially pulling past the McLaren of Norris who's been so good at placing above the pack, seeing how unattainable even one place higher actually is for him

[@cpasa798]

Dude, you are in another level all together

[@Kocan7]

TIme penalties for components over the limit is actually a reasonable idea, I would like to see that at least tested.

[@1320crusier]

It should just be one engine per race. This whole thing was to save money. It failed at that so its time to drop it

[@chrisr4023]

I think when the Penalty is more than back of the grid (In case of TSU), the remaining penalty should carry on to the next race. This can be an issue if a driver gets a heavy peanalty for misconduct and using that as an opportunity to change power unit, etc. without further disadvantage. However, this should count only the penalty, without considering the drivers position in Qualifying. Example: 20 grid pen. = 1 race 25 Grid pen. = 20 for 1 race + 5 on the next. Hope it makes sense

[@Shaun.Stephens]

Thanks for the video Stuart. I have to say that I agree with all of that.

[@BigDickMark]

Chainbear is so good at F1. My favorite Formuladank post was was the Ferrari pitwall saying "we're checking" and then loading a Chainbear video.

[@DW1337]

Concise video, excellent job!

[@Nikillem]

I like grid penalties because you see fast cars fight through the pack

[@C41N4]

I like your time penalty system. I think it’s an elegant solution 👍🏽

[@driesvanoosten4417]

Thanks for clearing up the grid penalty thing.

[@tonychan1806]

love the analysis

[@Conservator.]

Excellent as always! 👌

[@juli7xxxxx]

The thing that bothered me most about the SC situation in Monza was that it took so long to even come out AGAIN. We saw Ricciardo parked on the side with a tire still on track. Everyone knew in that second he stopped moving there had to be a safety car. Either because there needed to be marshalls pushing the car behind the barriers or because the crane needs to come out. Why wait over a minute to call it?

[@Kaimax61]

"everyone knew" ? then why was Vettel's a Virtual one? He did the same thing parking it on the grass on the right hand side. It's easy to talk on hindsight, but race control didn't expected the car to be not pushable (Gears stuck, Ricciardo didn't put it in neutral)

[@FlatBlack_240LSX]

That penalty/order graphic was superb

[@erasmus_locke]

Time penalties in the race would be infinitely more confusing than grid penalties for qualifying can you imagine the race finishing with or staffing in first but then ends up in 5th because of the time penalty you know how pissed people would be?

[@AnthonyTeasdale]

One problem with them truly having to serve penalties for components. You are then going to have action taken for if the issue was not your fault. Say someone takes you out on track and destroys components. Well then you would fell it very unfair sat in your pit box for x seconds.

[@cuszco]

Same goes for the cost cap, really. Someone can send you into a wall, get a penalty for it, but the costs are still for the victim's team.

[@chrisadye1590]

As always a lot of good sense in this.

[@SmirkyWaters]

Totally agree with your analysis on Monza finish. The procedure as is was properly followed (this time...), but I would love to see a complete rethinking of safety car, yellow and red flag rules, even beyond the adjustments you suggest, which would already make things better. Even though finishes under safety car have been rare, I feel like more and more races are being decided by safety cars in the last quarter, to the point that it's not even a strategic gamble anymore. Would be great if you could do a video with a statistical analysis of whether this has indeed been a trend (and not just my frustration talking) and how it has affected results.

[@alancox5777]

Ahhhhh a real video at Long Last. I’ve missed these

[@andreasproccati7178]

Closing credits right after the video and not after the ads is so much better

[@masonbeck566]

6:58 ooooooh I like this idea. Time penalties on track are far more effective than grid slot drops. As we’ve seen with Max and Red Bull, they can start from any where and win a race. It also adds an additional layer of strategy: do you take the hit early in the race? Also, you can’t serve a time penalty under the safety car, so that should keep people that are annoyed by cheap pit stops happy. Very good solution and I second the motion.

[@bukharijabarazman2700]

Grid penalties: I love the idea of using the cost cap, it affects everyone equally, and every team will be doing everything they can to use the least amount of PU components over the limit, or risk not even finishing the season… Safety Car at end of race: I don’t see anything wrong with finishing a race under the SC. Sure, it is a little anticlimactic, but it just happens sometimes. In Monza, it was the FIA who had a little bit of a problem sorting out the SC, picking up Russell and etc. Surely if the SC picked up Max a little earlier, a last lap dash was possible…

[@matiziol7315]

i preferred the grid drop system from a few years ago, both bc we could say that Alonso has a 100 place grid drop, and bc it was much clearer to me, just apply all the penalties in whichever order you want, and then move the cars forward to fill the gaps. I dont know if it was better or more fair, but it was a lot easier to wrap my head around

[@lwclark]

Yes, that time penalty idea is excellent. Tough to gauge how many seconds to penalize per component though. Tempting to make it a progressive scale based on constructors' points. The more points the more seconds per component.

[@DorkingtonHacker]

The main complaints I've heard about this weekend have been about the time it takes the powers that be to do anything. Apparently it was four hours before an official grid was published after qualifying. Sure some journalists were getting their maths wrong, but it shouldn't really be up to the press to decide the grid order. Then it was something like a full lap before the saftey car was called. Given where the car was parked, the marshals couldn't have cleared it under yellow flags, no matter what the situation on the ground was. Determination to follow to procedure has led to race control being slow to call SC/VSC on a number of occasions this season. That's not good for safety. And then we had the wrong car being picked up by the safety car. As well as being another embarrasing example of race control not knowing something as basic as who's leading the race, it was a costly error that meant the race ended under the safety car when there should have been time for at least one racing lap. I'm sure Max would have won in pretty much any conceivable set of circumstances, so it didn't affect the outcome, but it's not great.

[@tompw3141]

Given the penalties are known before qualifying even starts, it shouldn't take more than a minute or two for the official order to be published.

[@mymindmakesnoises]

I still don't understand why you are receiving 10 places grid drop for your 1st engine over the limit, but only 5 places for another one. Where is the logic? They penalize you less for a recidivism.

[@thryrik]

The thing I would like to see changed most is pits closed under VSC and until the SC has collected the field on a full yellow. always seems to be held to display until just the right moment for some.

[@AndreSomers]

Thanks for another interesting video. I largely agree with it, though I think we can also speed up the current SC procedure by not having cars unlap themselves but rather have them _be_ lapped if the car behind them behind the SC is actually ahead of them in the race. That shuffle can be done at low speed while the SC is still needed to pace the field and work is still done on track, so it saves the whole time that is now spend on lapped cars overtaking. For example: we have cars 1, 16, 6 (+2), 44, 20 (+1) and 55 on track, but 6 has been lapped by 1 and 16 twice and 20 once (the +1 and +2 cars). As soon as the SC has the leader picked up, car 44, 20 and 55 may overtake car 6 (making 6 last and now lapped twice by everyone except 20 instead of just by 1 and 16), and car 55 can also overtake car 20. Now, the order is the real race order: 1, 16, 44, 55, 20 (+1) and 6 (+2). I think that would be quicker than the current way, and just as fair (the cars getting overtaken would have gotten blue flags anyway).

[@qyxgames]

Why? They wouldnt be unlapped (which I find functionally wrong, but unless they also change it they would still be lapped)

[@AndreSomers]

@@qyxgames because it’s quicker to do as it can all happen at lower speeds behind the SC as opposed to having to first wait until the work is done and then for the cars to get ahead enough to restart. Saves a lap, maybe 2 is SC. It’s a slight disadvantage for lapped cars instead of a significant advantage though.

[@qyxgames]

@@AndreSomers I honestly think it would be better if they would unlap themselves instantly

[@fhz3062]

@@AndreSomers, although I totally agree your reorder idea is faster, I fear there are some technical issues with the race order system and some issues with the distance the car has raced. These issues should be the reason why your idea is not in practice nowadays.

[@AndreSomers]

@@fhz3062 What issues? Cars would just be marked as lapped (+1, +2...) just like they are now. The systems already deal with that, and lapped cars already don't race the full distance.

[@Vok250]

Glad to see you back dude. Misfeed your edited videos!

[@jhart4897]

That animation was more fun to watch than the actual qualifying.

[@karstenve]

I think the current it system is alright. That said the MotoGP long lap system is something I'd investigate in F1

[@olilarsen-wright5404]

On the note of 'racing to the end' BTCC add laps behind the safety car to the race distance, up to a maximum, say 3 laps behind the safety car makes a 17 lap race a 20 lap race. That could be an option. They have a cap on the number of laps they add to stop the teams needing to running excessive fuel loads.

[@Gnrnrvids]

I like your time penalty idea for engine parts. I think they should be allowed parts for free where that part was damaged in a crash (proven to be damaged, such as car went in to the wall backwards with the gearbox taking the impact). But your suggestion is great. Grid penalties can then be kept for driver infractions etc.

[@phodge9985]

To see it Visually for the penalties it makes sense to me now

[@StevenC1119]

I think the main confusing with assigning grid penalties comes from the fact that examples being used don'ts move the entire grid up at one time. They (including Chainbear) slide up the first set of five, then slot in Verstappen, then slide up the next set, and so on. What needs to be done is a removal of penalty drivers (as done here), then shift up ALL non-penalty grid spots AND the blank spaces, then slide back in the penalty drives. If they're in a blank spot, no harm. If a driver is in a spot held by another driver, the rightful owner of that place gets the space and the rest slide down. Then, slide everyone up to fill any blank spaces remaining, THEN add the back of the grid penalties.

[@Gatorsfan456]

9:50 literally exactly what I commented on WTF1’s video. There is the opportunity to be safe, fair, and exciting in my opinion

[@daviernestpradipta4646]

I don’t think anyone else has said this, but not allowing stacking penalties would be a solution to the Magnussen dilemma; so if he has 15 grid drop and he can only serve 3 this race, save the 12 for future race(s)

[@dielegende9141]

How they did the penalties was very reasonable (essentially having every penalty served as fully as possible), but it was simply blatantly against how the rules prescribe it - specifically Article 42.3 of the Sporting Regulations, which very clearly says that position penalties are applied before back of the grid penalties.

[@BrunodeSouzaLino]

Thing is, they were. But there's only 20 grid slots. When several drivers are receiving grid penalties that put them beyond P20, you have to look at other infractions to determine the order, then put the less offending ones at the top.

[@dielegende9141]

@@BrunodeSouzaLino they weren't. If they had been, Hamilton would still be ahead of Verstappen after the position penalties are applied, and thereby promote Verstappen to 6th once his back of the grid penalty is applied

[@maxip7090]

when there is such incident in the last 5% of the race, you also could do a Pitlane restart and release car by car with the pre red flag gap so its even more fair (maybe put in a system that reduces huge time gaps like Verstappen to LeClerc)

[@christiankrueger8048]

Thank you, Sir!

[@PunnamarajVinayakTejas]

I've always had this crazy idea that if you don't take your full penalty (like Checo only took 9 instead of 10), you serve the rest at the next race. But we could probably go for a mix of your solution and say that any unserved penalty will be converted into a race time penalty, and remove the 15+ = back-of-the-grid penalty rule

[@LisztyLiszt]

I can't believe there's only 6 races left. Last season felt sooo long, maybe because it went into December, but still, I can't believe we're at the end.

[@davidmoore349]

As an old guy, I do not LOVE races ending under yellow, but it's a thing that happens. I wouldn't have a problem with changing procedure in any series to where they say "if X% of laps from the end we move from Safety Car to Red Flag" or whatever. And honestly, I don't have an issue with the Green White Checker in NASCAR specifically, but when you start going over to road course that just is... silly. But really, sometimes things happen, and races end under yellow/safety car. Maybe I'm just old but sometimes racing is hard and unfun and that's great! haha.

[@cornishcactus]

Problem with your point one of the safety car neutralising things is, the climax was over in Abu Dubai too with Lewis seconds ahead. As I only get to see Ch4 I'm still left confused because of the edits that even when Max was picked up why two cars didn't bother to unlap themselves, they seems to be why they couldn't restart yet it's getting no mention anywhere.

[@JordanHembrow95]

My only real gripe is that drivers are allowed to tactically take PU penalties when they have others pending (Tsunoda last weekend or Max after Monza last year). If they literally cannot build a car with current components then it should be allowed, but otherwise teams and drivers can purposely ruin the races or qualifying laps of others because they know they are taking a penalty next race anyway. Finishing under SC for a late break down is absolutely fine, there would've been far fewer complaints if it were not for the chance of a Ferrari to win at Monza

[@jose21crisisTM]

Great video, as per usual The one problem I'd have with the "ban tyre changes under red flag" is: what do we do with cars with damaged/puncture tires? Do we send them out to do a lap with the damage before letting them pit? Or do we allow them to change the tires and gain an advantage over the field?.

[@arrgghh1555]

Allow them to come into the pits but they take the restart from pit lane.

[@clansome]

@@arrgghh1555 I still think pitlane needs to be closed under SC/VSC to stop any advantage only allowed to enter for safety reasons puncture etc. Otherwise penalty as per Lewis in Monza 2020.

[@mattrussell4880]

I'd say instead of "automatically" throwing the red, run one full lap under the SC then come in on the next. That allows one opportunity to pit, before the lane closes.

[@qyxgames]

The thing is, these red flags would appear after a SC has already been declared, letting people box if they need to

[@AndreSomers]

@@clansome that too can throw off a race though. If you were due to take a pit stop and had the gap, and the a sc is thrown, you are left on your too old tires while the field is completely bunched up again, so now your stop fro the lead doesn’t drop you to p3 but to the back of the field. How is that fair? I would see more in adding a 5 or 10s time penalty to a stop under vSC conditions, to equalize the difference a bit. Actual penalty could be different per circuit as you know the approximate advantages from stopping under a sc for a specific track.

[@lionnelmurimi651]

The time penalty this is absolutely genius. that way you can see time penalties even at monaco giving the driver on pole the opportunity to take a fresh pu and just send it for the whole race.

[@davec8921]

The other interesting wrinkle is not every team has control over the reliability of their power units, so it's not super fair if they're punished for something out of their control. It's not exactly easy to change engine suppliers these days.

[@ericstranne]

Correction - it’s not the Stewards who decide on the use of the Safety Car; it’s still the Race Director

[@NovemberOrWhatever]

The one issue I do have with the current penalty system is that Tsunoda got effectively no penalties for the reprimands or ignoring yellows because he was taking PU components anyway. I'd like to see a change to something like: If you're taking more than 15 places for PU stuff, penalties for unsafe driving go to the next race. If you get more than 15 places of PU penalties there as well, drive through

[@cigmorfil4101]

Slightly more than that, consider that: Verstappen qualified 2nd, but with a 5 place penalty started behind Alonso who qualified 10th; Sainz qualified 3rd but with a 20 place penalty started 18th behind Schumacher who qualified 20th with a 15 place penalty; Stroll qualified 18th but Perez who qualified 4th with a 10 place penalty started behind him; Hamilton with a 40 place penalty started behind Sainz behind Schumacher in 19th; Ocon qualified 11th with a 5 place penalty started behind Perez behind Stroll who qualified in 18th. If they slotted drivers in as per their penalty from top down and then renumbered, the grid would have been: LEC, RUS, NOR, VER, RIC, GAS, ALO, DEV, ZHO, PER, LAT, OCO, VET, STR, SAI, BOT, MAG, MSC, HAM, TSU. (I've added up all the penalty places that were given.)

[@richardshepherd5348]

The big problem with your deterrent of having seconds added on instead of grid penalties is, if you have a late safety car and all the cars are bunched up then you've lost your gap and will no doubt finish near the back.

[@Tashmann]

Procedure was followed exactly as the rules state so best and safest ending we could hope for...... pity this didn't happen last year.

[@stevelavergne2852]

There have been only 10 SC finishes in the almost 550 races (and 30 seasons) since the SC was introduced in 1993. On average. it happens once every 3 seasons. There is no reason to change the rules. IMO, all the kerfluffle is not about how it finished but about who won the race. The engine penalties are fine the way they are. It allows for the excitement of Verstappen or Sainz or Hamilton slicing through the field trying to maximize points. Time penalties take me back to the 1994 Japanese GP where they actually ran the race in two segments with the combined time determining the winner. The average viewer had only a vague idea of who was ahead in the race.

[@liamtheurchin5569]

Thanks for the concise video. Agreed with most if not all your points. F1 needs to get the starting grid out much quicker after quali. The green truck out on a live track was not good. These cars are prototypes after all. Can cars run at any pace while not directly behind the safety car?

[@riccardocas1239]

Love ur solution

[@JokerTheDank]

What if they just painted more starting slots and you actually start as back as your penalty is (if you're 38th, you start very very very behind). Probably impossible to do, but would be beautiful to see

[@rianmulcahy7200]

The 2017 McLaren would have started a lap down every race with those rules

[@JokerTheDank]

@@rianmulcahy7200 i take that as a win

[@BiggieTrismegistus]

This is the kind of outside the box thinking we need more of.

[@galliman123]

Pit lane start basically

[@JokerTheDank]

@@galliman123 no because it's an accurate amount of distance given how many penalties you accrued

[@sultanahmed-vj1mj]

I would genuinely have a graphic with the quali where the racers with pens even have it as a little thing next to their names saying what they got 3+ 5+ grid pen like the f1 games then the back of grid drivers will be put on a separate tower at the bottom left their position base in quali will still be next to their name just seperates and shows pens only way this would work is if engine parts were not allowed to be taken after quali

[@roellemaire1979]

I like the idea of time penalties instead of grid place penalties. Maybe not at the first pitstop. An other idea is x amount of adjusted laps (extra chicane, longer corner or something like that) that drivers have to take x times per penalty.

[@VykronianF1]

I think the best solution for grid penalties is counting the number of penalties a driver has, and whoever has the most goes to the back and as number of penalties drop you go to the front. Ex - Max has 20 place penalty he starts last, Lewis has 10 place penalty he starts 10 lower than qualifying, Charles has 25 place penalty he starts behind Max But if multiple drivers have the same amount of penalties then who’d start infringe of the other would have to qualify higher than the other. Ex - Checo and George has 30 place penalty and George qualifies higher than Checo, then Checo would start p20 and George p19.

[@ShimmeringSpectrum]

I *think* the current rules do something similar to that. If two drivers would be entitled to the same grid position, the one with fewer penalties gets priority to that slot. So in a theoretical scenario where you have this result in qualifying, where all three drivers should be starting from P15: P5 has a 10 place penalty P10 has a 5 place penalty P15 does not have a penalty Then you'd have the unpenalized driver take the highest slot, then the driver with five places of penalties, then the one with a ten place penalty. When multiple drivers have the same penalty, then the qualifying order is what breaks the tie.

[@EForrest88]

the thing that would fix the safety cars, just in general, is shutting the pitman when there's a safety car deployed. so much time is lost in stewards being able to clear the track because they have to wait for the cars to be queued up behind the safety car. With everyone diving into the pitman it takes ages for the safety car to pickup the lead driver and stack the pack behind them.

[@xavierandradev]

The issue with components is that it is not only about reliability and durability. A large fraction of parts, especially gearboxes, have to be replaced due to crashes that destroy them. So even if you had perfectly durable and reliable powertrains that last a whole season, there would be the need for replacements.

[@evilutionltd]

I think deducting points is a much better idea than throwing them down the grid because, as you say, once you are pushed down, you may as well blow it out of the water and go mad with the new parts. The parts should be done on a sliding scale so the more of that part you use, the more points are deducted. Such as 10 points for the 1st engine, 15 for the 2nd, 20 for the 3rd etc. If the driver hasn't got enough points to pay, the rest can be taken from the team. If that all goes to zero, start with the time penalties.

[@T_Mo271]

Time penalties during the race sounds like a great concept.

[@shreeharimittal2419]

I think the "in race" penalty idea is genuinely better. It keeps both, Sundays and Saturdays interesting and important. And, it still gives a very good show, since drivers will have to take care of the penalties within the race

[@AvenEngineer]

One thing I think F1 should consider is specifically designing F1 recovery vehicles. At the moment, we hook up F1 cars to machines designed for a completely different purpose. This often takes ages, and all looks a bit ham fisted and agricultural. Lots of big brains in F1 should be able to design a vehicle that swoops in and removes broken F1 cars rapidly.

[@oppenz3723]

That would shoot the cost of each race straight to the stratosphere. This solution requires the specialized heavy machinery either be shipped to every race or have one on standby at each track, not to mention the maintenance required to maintain said machinery. It just doesn't make much sense compared to current solution. Just look at the safety car, it's a production car with added safety light so the cost is very minimal and you can let car manufacturer foot the bill anyway and get extra money with sponsorship deal.

[@Yoonie_Stars]

@@oppenz3723 the safety and medical car are heavily modified inside. They have a lot of monitoring and communication equipment added. They take 2 safety cars and 2 medical cars with them from rac to race.

[@oppenz3723]

@@Yoonie_Stars yeah, the key point is it's modified INSIDE, not the whole car. Safety is safety after all, while a broken down formula car is an inconvenient at most. There's always red flag option if it do become more than inconvenience. Safety car is provided and maintained by manufacturer via sponsorship, so the cost is practically zero. Trying to move one heavy machinery from one race to another is a whole another level of logistical challenge, let alone 2 for the spare unit. It simply far more easier and cost effective to contract local operator using industry standard machinery because it already exist. We don't need to reinvent the wheel.

[@timothydevenport2878]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[@shafwandito4724]

@@Yoonie_Stars bringing a fucking whole big ass machinery is different than 4 modified cars...

[@alexwright6038]

I do like the idea of a time penalty for each additional power unit component over the limits. It has to be large enough to encourage them just throwing parts maybe 10 seconds for the first item added 30 seconds for the second, 60 seconds for the third, 100 seconds for the forth and 160 seconds for the fifth part. I think it is important that there is an increasing amount of time between additional components. The only power unit development should be improving reliability.

[@JippaJ]

Nice one Chain Bear. Pretty neutral opinion and some nice insights. And yeah, tractors/cranes shouldn't be on track, horrible memories of Bianchi come to mind...

[@Austin-cn8vh]

An idea that came up while my mates and I were watching the race wsa that SC in N number of final laps (5 for this one for instance) equals a red flag. The FIA keeps a supply of inspected spare fuel for the cars, say enough for five laps. The race is then restarted and extended in a five lap "overtime". Meaning the race then becomes N +5 laps and the FIA allows the teams to add those controlled five extra laps of fuel to the cars in the pits under supervision. Bonus here being no tire change, just the extra fuel and any repairs needed to ensure safe racing.

[@galliman123]

Only problem is the way they fuel the F1 cars is now incredibly slow and would overall detract from the race amongst other things sadly

[@zackberry6729]

In regards to the tractor on the track while the SC is out, let’s not forget we’ve had drivers bin it under SC before