Drivers call DRS “a big step forward”

2011 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Petrov: DRS fan

F1 drivers praised the Drag Reduction System, which is expected to increase overtaking at the Yas Marina circuit.

Last year’s Abu Dhabi Grand Prix became a cause celebre for the problem of overtaking in Formula 1 as Fernando Alonso lost the world championship after spending most of the race stuck behind Vitaly Petrov.

Speaking in today’s press conference Petrov admitted it would be much harder to keep Alonso behind in similar circumstances this year with DRS and the 2011-specification tyres.

The Renault driver endorsed the introduction of the moveable rear wings this year, saying: “I think that it’s definitely a big step forward.

“I think we will keep this for many years, five or ten years. I think it’s a good chance for us to overtake and good for you to write something about overtaking, so I think it’s a good step.”

Sebastien Buemi agreed, saying: “I think it’s definitely a positive.

“We’ve seen a lot more overtaking; we’ve even seen some overtaking in Monaco. It’s definitely good.

“Sometimes it feels like the DRS zone is not long enough but I definitely think it’s going to help a lot this weekend.”

2011 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

    Browse all 2011 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix articles

    Image © Renault/LAT

    Author information

    Keith Collantine
    Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

    Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

    97 comments on “Drivers call DRS “a big step forward””

    1. Some drivers just don’t have the balls to speak their own mind…

      1. Well… What if they do like it?

      2. why? it is a good direction to go, it only needs some polishing IMO.

        1. @Fer-no.65 Agreed. It’s naive to think they would get it right first time round.

      3. Are you implying that they’re ‘robots’ If so then I understand that,Many Drivers say what’s best for the Sport & business which is respectful but that could lead to unintention dishonesty.

        Personally i think the honest drivers on the grid today are Hamilton & Webber.

      4. So, this is a case of “they disagree with me, so therefore they’re lying”?

      5. Everyone has an opinion about DRS. It would be good to see what each individual driver has to say about it, as THEY are the ones who race.
        As for al this for and against DRS bickering, this is modern F1! What do you expect!???
        You want to see real racing? Go and watch Go Carts! No DRS, no KERS, no tyre strategy, no refuelling strategy. Like Senna said, pure racing!
        F1 is never going to return to the good old days of pure and simple raw racing machines. So why waste time getting all frustrated and arguing about it!?

    2. I still think that in many cases, passing a driver with DRS is something quite different to actually racing and overtaking someone. But I do agree that with a track like this, and the way the cars currently work, it’s a useful stopgap. But then keeping it instead of improving the gap it was supposed to stop, while probably quite normal, easy, and common in our everyday lives, is not a good or real solution.

      I don’t think it will make okay or good races much better, just help make tirelessly processional races more dynamic. And if that’s needed at a new track, some- or many a one did something wrong.

    3. This makes me feel very sad. So much for DRS being a stop-gap solution. In some cases it works in the way it should, helping drivers make up the ground they lose by running in dirty air and therefore attempt a pass, but all too often it involves cars arbitrarily breezing past on the straights. That isn’t real racing, and the best drivers in the world should not consider it to be- especially the very driver who benefited from great defensive driving at the very same event last year.

      1. all too often it involves cars arbitrarily breezing past on the straights

        In those cases, the difference in speed between the cars is already so great that the pass would likely have happened without DRS. Only a handful of passes this year have been solely a product of the DRS

        1. I agree partly with this, the one that springs to mind because I know people were rattling on about it was Lewis retaking Mark in Korea, the video has a great view showing Lewis was already side by side with Mark before the DRS line and Lewis had a higher top speed according to the speed trap in Quali (314.6 vs 312.2) so I would imagine regardless of DRS Lewis would’ve retaken that place. The DRS just made it look easier than it was.

    4. whereas turning up your engine to overtake is completely pure racing ?

      Its an added dimension only a flat earther would deny its worked.

      1. A lot of people disagree, so saying everybody else is a flat earther seems a bit off. There are certainly examples where it’s worked, but equally there have been plenty of times it hasn’t worked at all. Turning engines up is something that is available to everybody, and when people turn up engines it can be strategic when they do so, so yes it is more fundamentally racing than DRS where only the attacking driver can ever access it. Coulthard has throughout the year referred to your point as being why DRS is okay and in the spirit of F1 in the 80’s, and failed every time to comprehend why it is something very different.

        1. But the attacking driver can only use it in very specific circumstances.

          If the defending driver remains more than a second ahead, there’s nothing to worry about.

          Once a driver is within 1 second, the very nature of F1 cars means they are subjected to dirty-air which immediately puts them at a disadvantage before ever attempting a move. DRS is not about giving the attacking driver an unfair advantage – it’s supposed to be an equaliser.

          1. Yes and when it is an equaliser it is fine, but all too often the attacking driver breezes past before the braking zone, and the defending driver can’t even do as much as defend their line. Also, the double DRS zone in Canada was a joke.

            1. Couldn’t agree more.

            2. @Matt90

              Yes and when it is an equaliser it is fine, but all too often the attacking driver breezes past before the braking zone, and the defending driver can’t even do as much as defend their line.

              I respectfully disagree with you, here. Yes, some DRS passes have resulted in painfully easy overtaking moves like that and I fully agree that that is a problem. But the fact is that many (probably the majority) of DRS ‘attempts’ have NOT resulted in any overtakes at all, let alone those sort of ‘breeze-by’ overtakes.

              Think Button/Massa in Melbourne, or Hamilton/Vettel in Spain, or Hamilton/Schumacher in Monza, or Webber/Hamilton in Korea. Despite several opportunities, none of those attacking drivers using DRS were able to pass their opponent for multiple laps or even at all.

              The key issue with DRS, I believe, is that it is too dependent on the zones. If the FIA get it right – Melbourne, Sepang, Shanghai, Monaco, Nurburgring, Singapore, Suzuka – DRS works brilliantly because it allows drivers an opportunity to make a move without making it too easy. If they get it wrong – Istanbul, Montreal, Spa – it does indeed make things too easy.

              It’s important, therefore, that the FIA learn from the information they’ve gained about DRS this season and use it to make more informed, intelligent decisions about where they put the activation zones next year to strike the right balance.

              Also, the double DRS zone in Canada was a joke.

              No arguments there. That was stupid. One detection point per activation zone from now on, please.

            3. Good point/post. I still think we really need to see a race without DRS but all the other current regs at a track with half a chance of producing a decent race regardless (not Abu Dhabi, Singapore or Valencia) to see how necessary it truly is though, or whether some tracks would benefit from it where others don’t need actually need it.

            4. I am no fan of DRS for what it means – giving the guy behind an advantage to tip his chances of getting past. And I fully agree with those saying its a big shame this stop gap solution will now get to be a permanent fixture.

              And they need to learn from this year and get the zones better. But I am fully willing to give DRS the maximum chance here to show it can get people to overtake someone on track

          2. Why 1 second? Why is this unit of human measurement so comparable to the effect of dirty air through a series of any undefined corners before a straight?

            How about reducing the amount of ‘dirty air’ by reducing aero dependence, making the tyres wider and sticking the exhaust exits into the sky so they don’t create even more turbulence – there’s an idea. Then we wouldn’t need DRS and the artificial adjustment it tries to make.

            DRS is the cosmetic surgery of F1.

      2. @antonyob

        whereas turning up your engine to overtake is completely pure racing?

        Yes, because the other guy can turn his engine up too.

        But he’s not allowed to activate his DRS while the other driver uses his, gets a massive speed boost and goes flying past.

        1. These are my feelings pretty exactly. As has been said, Indy Car’s “push-to-pass” button is executed slightly more in the spirit of fair racing: everyone has it at all times and it is therefore up to the driver to decide when is best to utilize it. If DRS was employed in the same way (you get to use it X amount of times per race and after that you’re out of them), I’d be much more in favor of it.

        2. Whoops I see you made the same point :-)

        3. And KERS is a “both drivers can use it whenever they want” solution – and it doesn’t work.

          The driver in front has a massive aero advantage. That advantage needs to be negated in order for passing to happen. DRS is a simple way of doing it. It may not produce the types of overtakes you want all the time, but a “both drivers have the same button” solution only serves to continue the status quo.

      3. whereas turning up your engine to overtake is completely pure racing ?

        Not really a valid comparison IMO, as the car in front can also turn their engine up.

        DRS should only remain until they find a solution to following through corners. The advantage on straights and into the break zone is all wrong (there is not disadvantage to a following car there), but it is better than nothing for now.

      4. Another good point.

      5. One often unmentioned issue is the rev limit.

        We’ve had more mention of it this year due to the gear choices the teams have to make, balancing top speed, DRS, fuel loads at different stages of the race, qualifying, etc.

        Right now there are many cases where someone can’t get past simply because of the rev limit and without the rev limit they would be inherently faster and able to make an overtaking attempt.

        So why have a rev limit at all ?

        Originally the rev limit was to reduce costs, improve reliability and put a restriction on engine power. The number of engines rule was introduced later.

        But now that we have a limit on the number of engines I can’t see why we need to have a rev limit at all. The engineering choices and race tactics are limited by the rules on the number of engines without having to have a separate rev limiter.

        What’s wrong with have unrestricted rev limits ? Teams could turn up the wick by running higher rev limits to aid overtaking… but they’d run the risk of blowing their engines and paying penalties over the course of the season.

        And what’s wrong with that ?

        My two most obvious ‘easy’ improvements to the “show” are:

        1. remove the blue flag “get out of the way” rule
        2. remove the rev limiter

    5. I hope sometime in the future we can see DRS with no restrictions in races and still see some overtaking, I think that is the purpose of moveable wings.

      1. The problem is that as soon as a defending driver can use his rear wing, the advantage to the attacking driver is marginalised. The effect would be the same if neither was using DRS.

        1. So how is it “overtaking” to give the driver behind a boost that the guy in ifront is prevented from defending ?

          This is why it is an articial gimick that increases “passing” but undermines “overtaking”.

    6. DRS and KERS ruined 2011 for me after brilliant 2010, I’m very disappointed to hear drivers praising this idea, which in my opinion is killing the fun from watching drivers compete. Can’t drivers just deal with the fact that it’s hard to overtake in Abu Dhabi?

      1. whats wrong with KERS? everyone’s allowed it. anyone can use it at any time they like!

      2. Really? DRS and KERS “ruined” this entire season for you?

        The whole thing?



      3. >whats wrong with KERS?
        >DRS and KERS “ruined” this entire season for you?

        Yes. Especially when we compare 2010 to 2011 – actual season is too “artificial” when it comes to pure racing.

        I think there’s too much technical stuff going around racing in Formula 1 right now in my opinion. I’d prefer things to be more like they were in 2008, minus the grooved tyres.

        1. With you on that mate, The 08 Cars & Regs Were alot better. Get DRS & KERS outta here. The good drivers can overtake without the DRS.

        2. @xivizmath Well, with the greatest respect, what do you expect from the pinnacle of motorsport? The moment this sport stops hunting for that extra thousandth with aero tweaks you’ve just lost the reason why F1 is where it is.

    7. I’m pleased to hear the drivers themselves echoing my own views on DRS.

      For a number of reasons this season, we’ve seen a lot more overtaking – even on Tilke tracks. DRS has unarguably played a role in that and I feel it’s added an extra dimension to the racing this year. I feel DRS has a place in the current Formula and so I’m pleased that the drivers are keen on retaining it also.

      Is DRS perfect? No. Of course it isn’t.

      Is it better than the prospect of returning to the boring processions of old when drivers didn’t have any chance of passing slower rivals? Absolutely.

      But I’m not holding my breath about it working in Abu Dhabi too well. The painfully slow corners before both the straights will make DRS practically useless as the concertina effect under acceleration from those tight turns will keep cars spread out for most of the straight.

      1. @Magnificent-Geoffrey

        Is it better than the prospect of returning to the boring processions of old when drivers didn’t have any chance of passing slower rivals? Absolutely.

        With the new tyres and with the return of KERS I do not believe we would go straight back to processions without DRS.

        And it’s a terrible shame they missed the opportunity to find that out by rushing in this silly little gimmick.

        1. @Keith-Collantine

          With the new tyres and with the return of KERS I do not believe we would go straight back to processions without DRS.

          If this was earlier in the season, I’d probably have agreed with you completely. However, over the past few races we’ve seen a stagnation of exciting racing situations emerging from Pirelli tyres and KERS. At both Korea and India, the vast majority of overtaking moves were made as a direct result of DRS. Tyres and KERS led to hardly any overtakes outside of DRS zones.

          Now, I’m not saying that’s a good thing. It isn’t. But it says to me that Pirellis and KERS can only do so much. Granted, Korea and India are both Tilkedromes. But if F1 will continue to go to these new circuits with their very uniform layouts of straight, slow, straight, slow, I’d argue that DRS will have an important role in ensuring those circuits don’t produce boring, processional races every single time, guaranteed.

          1. @magnificent-geoffrey

            If your argument is “F1 needs DRS because it keeps going to rubbish tracks” then we’re definitely never going to agree!

            In that case what F1 clearly needs better tracks. Using DRS as a sticking plaster just makes a bad situation worse.

            Is the future of F1 really 30 Tilkedromes with cars queueing up around the obligatory twisty bit, perhaps in front of a harbour or some pretty hotels, then flapping their DRS wings to pass each other on mile-long straights?

            That’s not the sport of Fangio, Stewart and Senna. That’s a third-rate facsimile of motor racing.

            1. @KeithCollantine

              If your argument is “F1 needs DRS because it keeps going to rubbish tracks” then we’re definitely never going to agree!

              No, that’s not the ONLY reason why I support DRS. :P And to clarify, I don’t believe F1 needs DRS – I just genuinely believe that it adds something significant to the racing element of the formula. That’s all.

              In that case what F1 clearly needs better tracks. Using DRS as a sticking plaster just makes a bad situation worse.

              Oh definitely. F1 needs better tracks, for sure. However, I don’t quite see how having DRS on the Tilkedromes makes anything worse. To borrow your analogy, if boring circuits are like an injury and DRS is just a sticking plaster, of course it won’t suddenly cure you if you apply it, but it’s certainly a better option than having nothing at all.

              Is the future of F1 really 30 Tilkedromes with cars queueing up around the obligatory twisty bit, perhaps in front of a harbour or some pretty hotels, then flapping their DRS wings to pass each other on mile-long straights?

              I hope it isn’t. I hope F1 finds a better solution to the dirty-air problem which will allow drivers the opportunity to make moves more naturally. But until then, we have to deal with what we’ve got and I feel DRS is a simple, cheap and worthwhile means through which the sport can attempt to curb the deterrents to overtaking that Pirellis and KERS alone cannot overcome.

            2. Commercial reasons mean there is no reasonable likelihood of a decrease in the number of new tracks on the calendar. Arguing based on an assumption that there will be is fallacious.

            3. @KeithCollantine but what do you suggest to solve the problem of the dirty air?

              We can’t compare modern F1 cars with those from more than a decade ago. They became so efficient nowadays that a quicker driver can’t do much and end up stuck behind.

              For me the DRS is a reasonable solution. Or they can drastically reduce the aerodynamic efficiency through strict rules, reducing wing size and ground effect. But the whole speed will be reduced, compromising the category as the pinnacle of motorsport.

            4. @Keith_Collantine India, by all accounts, is not a “rubbish track”. Yet its race was the most boring of the year – because the teams have now adapted to the Pirelli tyres, and working out the best KERS strategies is easily done in the simulator.

          2. I think the tyres more than anything this year have lead to most of the overtaking, but that I think is because they have largely been an unknown quantity and the behaviour of the race rubber has been quite unlike the predictions. But eventually, and we are already starting to see it, unless Pirelli keep changing everything, the tyres will become a known quantity, strategies will become the same for most teams and the easy overtakes due to tyres will become less and less common.
            That doesn’t make me a fan of DRS far from it, but neither do I like seeing one driver on new tyres simply drive round the outside of a driver on tyres a few laps older. Yes they are both overtaking, but not the fights of skilled drivers taking things to the limit that I personally class as great overtaking and that’s what over the years I’ve always wanted to see.
            They are both sticking plasters on a gaping wound which is the sensitivity of modern F1 cars to dirty air. Looking at the Haynes manual on the Red Bull car I was astonished how much of the total downforce comes from the front wing. As the front wing is normally in clean air when not following another car it doesn’t take a genius to work out that until that proportion is hugely reduced they will remain very sensitive to dirty air. I personally would love to see front wings banned entirely or a least restricted to something small and simple, that way perhaps we would see more real overtaking moves and hopefully less artificial ones.

        2. I did wonder why on earth they introduced 3 new factors at once, making it very difficult to see where the improvements are really coming from.

        3. I insist they should try to do a whole race without DRS. Interlagos without DRS would be great.

          1. 2nd that. What is the point of them not experimenting with it? How else do they determine the real validity of it?

          2. Why, there,s been 60 odd years of F1 without DRS. We know what F1 is like without DRS.

            1. We don’t know what it is like with KERS, pirellis and no DRS.

          3. YES YES YES. Why haven’t they done that. We need control experiments and now the championship is over this makes perfect sense (that’s why it won’t be done).

            1. Why would Pirelli tyres be a magical pill for passing. Tyre maker’s have come and gone in the past. Never produced passing before, why would it this time.

            2. @john-h No, the reason they haven’t done that is because there are still battles within the championship that need to be settled. IF all the teams AND all the drivers were far enough apart from each other to make no difference to the standings no matter what, THEN they would consider mixing things up. Any attempt at doing it before would be just the same as the Silverstone incident where things became over-complicated and it resulted in emergency meetings held a few hours before the race to sort out an agreement.

              If the FIA were to bring back non-championship races however, that might be a chance for them to experiment.. I believe Keith did an article on that a few months ago…

            3. @KeeleyObssesed I understand your point of course, but you know what I mean in terms of importance.. the constructors and the drivers are done, but I do get what you’re saying especially in terms of that 10th spot in the standings.

              And not having drs is a relatively minor change compared to the hassle of getting rid of ebds for a single race.

          4. I’m a supporter of DRS – but with both championships now over, if the FIA said “we’re going to try interlagos without DRS, just to see what happens”, I’d have no problem with that whatsoever.

            1. I dont ‘t believe tyre stratagy alone is a permanant solution to passing or lack of in F1. F1 driver’s will just go back to ” for sure I was faster than ….. but once I got in that turbulant air I just could’nt get close enough to get by” We have all heard this time and time again.

            2. Using Interlagos, an extrremely overtaking-friendly track, for the no-DRS trial would not exactly be good grounds for comparison.

      2. Only Two, count them Two races that were boring in 2010 that weren’t boring in 2011 (Valencia was poor in both), oh wait the 1st of the two didn’t even happen Borerain.
        People have odd memories, I agree with others that say it wasn’t broken in 2010, and with KERS back in 2011 & tyres (that are no better than the 1st half of the year where they were to inconsistent) it would of been as near as good as it gets without DRS.

        1. *now better, not no better, lol

          1. @Keith…I agree with your opinion about the silly little gadget completely…I don’t care at what tracks it has worked or hasn’t, it is still a gadget.

            Most who are fans of it still say it isn’t perfect but is better than processions but I think you correctly point out the mechanical grip provided by the Pirellis may have been enough, and the only other thing I would do is restrict their wings such that the cars are less aero dependant. That way we have passing by the drivers’ seats of their pants rather than by a gadget.

    8. It’s a shame venturis were cancelled because developing the new tech was ‘too expensive’ – especially when Ferrari, Mclaren and RBR will spend over half a billion pounds between them… money clearly wouldn’t be an issue – I’d go as far as saying the big 3 don’t want their feathers ruffled with another upset of the running order like 2009 because reintroducing ground effect is a huge change, and any team could ge caught out and be left behind…

    9. Cliche it is, but the main problem with DRS is, it is stripping off real racing.
      No race-start mayhems, no wheel-to-wheel between faster and less faster cars. Remember last year Sepang, Sutil holding-off Hamilton for good 25 laps, Petrov-Alonso, Kobayashi-Alonso and plenty more.
      This DRS has clearly divided whole grid in mini-grids: Unbeatable top-3, then next 5 and then backmarkers.

      1. I would say 4: Big 3, midfield, backmarkers and Mercedes stuck on their own! :P

    10. Drs is gud, bt it has made overtaking more easier and qicker but i hope the fuel strategy comes back , wow it waz so much fun when sum started on low fuel nd some on high fool,,, it was exciting,, more incidents than dominating,,, this season was bit on boring side with just redbull f1 team dominating in almost all the races, …

    11. I lost a lot of respect for Alonso after his petulant hand waving at Petrov after the race last year. DRS/KERS? I like both of them. I’d prefer KERS to be say, use it for 10 minutes during the race weekend, whenever you want.

    12. “We’ve seen a lot more overtaking; we’ve even seen some overtaking in Monaco. It’s definitely good.”

      i thought DRS wasn’t available in Monaco…

      1. At the drivers insistence they banned it’s use in the tunnel and used the DRS zone on the front straight.

      2. The fact its so hard to overtake at Monaco is part of the reason its so unique. Do we really want more overtakes? Personally I love the 10 car trains, Senna Mansell, Bernoldi Coulthard, etc.

        1. Many do, many don’t. Many prefer to not have overtakes, and feel Abu Dhabi 2010 was a great race, and the rest of us think that was a joke.

      3. I think we’ve seen more passes…. but is a car driving past another with KERS/DRS the same as a racing overtake ?

    13. With criteria, DRS can help overtaking without taking the job away from the drivers. Sometimes this year we’ve seen wrong positioning of the zones but overall it’s helped to spice up the races.

    14. I’ve said it once, and I’ve said it again:

      DRS is perhaps not perfect, however you have to consider that the leading driver has an enormous advantage with the “dirty air barrier”.

      DRS is simply levelling the playing field.

      1. But that dirty air already gives the car behind an advantage in the form of a slipstream down the starghts, All DRS does is give the car behind a double advantage in a straght line.

        And unlike a slipstream the DRS effect doesn’t dissapear when the following car pulls out to actually try the pass.

        DRS ain’t about racing & ain’t exciting, If it ain’t banned soon it will kill the sport & turn actual RACING fans against F1.

    15. So looks like there’s no point in my watching F1 next season.

      Hate DRS, Its seriously harmed my enjoyment of the racing this season.

      I like watching racing, good racing, wheel to wheel racing with real overtaking. DRS has done nothing but produce boring & often easy passing which are not exciting to watch in any way.

      I can’t see how manybody can like it & am massively dissapointed that these so called ‘RACING drivers’ support it.

    16. I spent several years working for FOM (From 97-06) & still have friends working there (Look out for an announcement from Sky this weekend regarding there coverage for 2012) & I have been told that there is far more negativity towards DRS within F1 than whats actually coming out.

      I was told back in March that people within F1 were asked not to critisise DRS or the Pirelli tyres in public & to discuss any critisisms in private in the drivers briefings. This is why Mark Webber hinted at disliking DRS after Shanghai but stopped short of actually saying it, Instead saying “I shoudn’t say anymore”.

      Something I have been frustrated with this year is how the F1 media have handled it. There is clearly an Anti-DRS argument which has sadly not been heard outside of places such as this. If you look at the FOTA fan forums there was never any Anti-DRS questions selected & never any real debate about it, It was all ‘DRS is great’ despite the fact that when fans were asked to raise there hands, Most went up for the ‘Don’t like DRS’ view.

      The bigger problem with DRS is that they risk becoming too reliant on DRS to provide overtaking & that will just see them unwilling to look at alternatives.

      1. Very interesting GT_Racer…thanks for that input. From day one I have been among the ‘don’t like DRS’ers.’

    17. The biggest flaw in using KERS and especially DRS is the arbitrary way it is used – only after two laps, only within a second of the car in front and only where we tell you to use it. How on earth is that real motorsport? This is interfering with races and makes a mockery of the sport.

      1. Then how would you suggest introducing it in a way that is fair, but without compromising the point of it?

        1. I would eliminate it because I agree that it makes a mockery of the sport…keep them on grippy tires, and limit the amount of wing they can use such that dirty air has a far less negative factor on the performance of the trailing car.

          I’ll once again paraphrase JV’s opinion which actually he spoke on when he was calling the newly introduced grooved tires a joke and got hauled up on the carpet for it. He said, give us back the big fat slicks of the 70’s. They have a load of mechanical grip and they created so much drag that in order to keep up any kind of repectable speeds on the straightaways you had to run less wing. Thus killing two birds with one stone…mechanical grip and less aero dependancy for seat of the pants passing by the driver, not by the circumstance of a gadget.

    18. these drivers only like drs so much because they are not very good at passing & drs offers there only chance to pass.

      they also obviously dont care about racing, they just want an easy guaranteed pass which is why buemi thinks the zones have not been long enough.

      i dont want to see drs passing, i want to see real racing with real passing and drs does not & never will provide this.

      if they keep drs then i can see many fans turning away, i may be one of them as i simply cannot stand this abomination!

    19. I don’t actually have a problem with the actual DRS system, My problem stems from the regulations surrounding its use during a Gp.

      If they do insist on keeping DRS they should run it like the Push-2-Pass sysetm used successfully elsewhere.

      Give everyone something like 20 uses during a race & let them use it anywhere they want & let them use it to either attack or defend. This at least brings in some real racing strategy & gives the car infront some opportunity to defend against a DRS car behind.

      Alternatively they could just drop DRS & run KERS in that way.

      The problem with DRS is that its the easiest solution to simply create passing, However for actual racing the way its been implemented its the worst solution they could have gone with.

      DRS has generated more passing, However I would argue that the actual quality of the racing has decreased as a result & I would rather see better racing than simply more passing, Especially if many of those passes are not that great to watch.

    20. No comments,I don’t like it but the drivers do so tough to judge.

    21. I like the DRS, it does exactly what it was designed to do.

      It helps a faster car get past a slower car. Instead of needing to be 1.5 seconds faster to get by, a car only needs to be 0.5 seconds faster to make the pass.

    22. Petrov is a fan of DRS? if Alonso had DRS last year, you cannot say such way! :D

      1. Alonso had an F-duct – which operated on the same principle, and was unrestricted in its use.

        1. @prisoner-monkeys So did Petrov.

          And from how I understand it, DRS is about reducing drag on the straights whereas F-Duct was more about adding downforce in the corners.

          1. The DRS and the F-duct work on the same principle: they change the airflow over the rear wing to negate drag on the straights. They just do it in slightly different ways, but the effect of both is identical.

            And Renault were one of the last teams to introduce an F-duct. They only had a passive system, where changes in the air pressure altered the flow of air over the rear wing, so the car had to be travelling at a certain speed before the passage of the air changed. Ferrari’s system was much more developed; it worked sooner than Renault’s.

          2. The F-Duct is very similar to the DRS as they both reduce drag and down force on the rear wing.

        2. Yeah, but if it was DRS not F-duct and the rule was same, Petrov definitely could’t defend his position right?

      2. Alonso being unable to pass Petrov last year is a clear example of what I’m talking about. But that gets spun as a pit stratagy blunder by Ferrari. That is not racing.

    23. Always good to hear some driver opinions on this controversial DRS. I think some sort of end of season review on F1 Fanatic would be brilliant. Some real discussions, not some disgruntled one-posters who aren’t interested in a debate.

    24. The DRS system is the easy solution to lack of chances to overtake, but we all know that the true solution is to reduce the aerodynamic downforce and turbulences. This will really bring us back the true F1 again but unfortunately it seems that they will never do this.

      Moreover, the drivers never critize anything related to the rules, or anything related to Bernie, he is the boss and they know it, I think that they are a little bit cowards in this aspect. :(

    25. DRS is not a gimmick, and as MG said it negates the aero loss. Its more effective on some tracks than others and its really just re-allowing slipstreaming which your much hailed Fangio, Stewart and to a lesser extent Senna won many races with. Senna also had a turbo boost button..but its ok if everyone has it- thats nonsense. Cars used to have many different tricks to winning. The Williams fw (something) that Mansell won the WDC had more electronics than a branch of Dixons and certainly more than anyone else. As did, in all probablilty, Scumachers Benetton.

      Plus this mythical time when Fangio raced – if you really knew your stuff you’d know that drivers used to get out of the way of a faster driver, so an overtake wasnt that bigger deal. The real gimmick is thinking only lots of overtakes can make a decent race. Not so!

      1. Lots of passes or lots of overtakes ?

        There is a significant difference in my view between a car simply passing another, and a driver overtaking the car in front…

        It simply is NOT racing for a driver to be overtaken because the regulations force them to be overtaken (by the blue flag rule or the following car’s DRS).

    26. DRS? Nah, I despise it. A resource that only one out of two drivers can use is, by principle, rubbish, IMHO.
      And until when are we all going to will say that Alonso lost a world title, when in fact he was unable to pass a slower car?

    Comments are closed.