Drivers “don’t need to train physically” – Button

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Jenson Button says F1 has become “easy” and drivers don’t need to train to be fit enough to race.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

A new rule will allow standing starts to be used more often during wet races next year, but perhaps rolling starts should still be used in extreme occasions:

And if next time the situation arises there’s a horrible accident due to the lack of visibility from the spray off the start?

Just saying there doesn’t need to be a hard and fast rule on this, it should be up to the race director and stewards on the day.

At Silverstone for example the sun came back out aiding visibility and it would have been quite safe, but if drizzle and overcast remains further hindering visibility, there should be nothing wrong with a rolling start.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Donwatters!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Nigel Mansell won a memorable Spanish Grand Prix 25 years ago today after racing wheel-to-wheel with Ayrton Senna down the main straight at the new Circuit de Catalunya.

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.

25 comments on “Drivers “don’t need to train physically” – Button”

  1. I could be wrong, but Seb’s time at Ferrari could end like Fernando’s. The signs are ominous.

    Funnily enough, Ferrari actually seemed to be a more cohesive unit from 2010 to 2013 compared to now. They used to make the most out of their situation more often than not in those days. They seem to have lost their a little more than usual these days.

    I think Ferrari have proven that the dont have a bad car, however, quite surprisingly, they’ve failed to maximize their potential on Sundays for the most part of the season. Ok, they’ve had bad luck thrown in the mix, but some of the decisions made have questionable.

    They’ve been in a constant state of transition since Stefano Domeniciali left, and they still dont appear to have a soild foundation. With a meddlesome trigger happy Chairman in charge, I doubt Ferrari will win again anytime soon.

    Inability to bed down sound strategy and perform efficiently in the pits on regular basis as they have recently shown, isnt exactly what you call the foundations of a winning machine.

    I predict Mclaren will finish ahead of Ferrari in next year’s WCC.

    1. if McL does finish ahead of Ferrari will it be crazy to think about Vettel move to Woking?

      1. @monosodico Yes, because Vettel also has a deep passion to make Ferrari work. I don’t believe he’ll be anywhere other than Ferrari soon, even if they struggle for another year or two.

        And McLaren finishing ahead of Ferrari all of a sudden is quite crazy, no? Their chassis isn’t anywhere near that of Ferrari even if Boullier says so. The PU isn’t close either. They perhaps can match them on one lap but hardly in the race.

        1. Even if Vettel would want to move to McLaren if they beat Ferrari (and I agree with @xtwl, that he is rather unlikely to give up on Ferrari quite yet), there would be no place for him.

          If the car is good, Alonso will almost certainly stay. And I really don’t see them dropping Stoffel and going for an expensive Vettel next to Fernando.

    2. @jaymenon10 Or maybe Red Bull’s top staff will join Ferrari :P

    3. ” more cohesive unit from 2010 to 2013 ”

      It´s simple, in those years there wasn´t a team that clear dominated the championship and RedBull/Mclaren had a lot of mechanical issues, despite bein fast, and Ferari could get some wins.

      Mercedes doesn´t have issues, so Ferrari can´t win, een if they were at the paradise of internal happiness.

  2. I completely agree with COTD. Standing starts in the wet are not always the right thing to do regardless of how many fans or media people want to see them.

    There are times when it would be perfectly safe to do but there are others when trying a standing start is not something they should consider. It should be a case by case basis rather than a set rule.

    I happened to be watching the 1996 Spanish Gp the other day & 3-4 cars were eliminated before they had really even got away from the grid because the visibility was so bad they couldn’t see each other. You also have the 1998 Belgium Gp where practically all of the drivers wanted a SC start yet were ignored & you ended up with most of the grid crashing on the exit of turn 1 because again cars further back couldn’t see what was happening ahead.

    there’s a brief in-car shot from the start of the 1996 spanish go in this video.

    In cases like Silverstone this year then fine do a standing start, But if its too wet & everyone can see its too wet I really do feel they should use caution & avoid possibly taking out half the field (No spare cars for restarts anymore remember).

    1. I agree. You only have to look at the last race to see how easily one simple mistake by one driver can result in another being put out of the race. In wet conditions traction is more likely to be compromised, meaning a higher probability of crashes than normal. It seemed to me the last race was proof the spaces between the cars is too small, especially at the back, the space between the cars should increase towards the back of the grid.
      Also, I don’t like the idea of stopping a race just so it can start, and the only justification for that is the thought of a rolling start is so abhorrent. Yes, a rolling start does eliminate those early overtakes that can put a driver several places up the grid, or a poor start means several places lost, but we are talking about a track that has poor grip and the driver has poor visibility.

    2. Thanks for saying it Tristan (with the CoTD). I agree that is can be very dangerous and that it should be a desicion made by the race director based on the circumstances.

    3. From what I read yesterday, it’s says they will ‘attempt’ to do more standing starts. There’s no ‘hard and fast’ rule as the COTD insinuates, although of course I agree with the notion of safety being a priority.

      The problem is recently, rolling starts have been used on a track where inters are the right tyre… That’s not the right direction for F1 to pursue (imho), remembering that the safest option is not to go racing at all. Hence, safety can never overrule _every_ other criteria, rather getting the balance right requires constant revision (in a dialectical sense) as we are seeing.

      1. @john-h Was going to say what you have. They haven’t said they will do standing re-starts even if it would be dangerous to do so.

    4. 1998 Belgium is a great example. That race was saved somewhat as each team had a spare car available. Nowadays a repeat would mean only a handful of cars restarting the race…it would look like US 2005 GP.

  3. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    29th September 2016, 1:57

    I don’t disagree with the COTD, but I would’ve thought the spray and visibility during a rolling start would be worse due to the cars travelling at higher speeds, thus dispersing more water.

    1. But little chance of a stationary car hiding in the spray….

    2. as @gitanes mentions, the danger with standing starts when it’s wet is about cars not getting away. Just imagine Max Verstappen having a start like he did in Singapore with spray all around. Sainz might have seen Max not getting away, but it would have been a mighty pile up because the cars behind (including probably Hulk, but certainly many coming from further back) would not even see the mess before they go into it at full speed @tophercheese21

  4. I too want some rain in Malaysia.

  5. COTD – that sounds suspiciously like common sense to me… Get out of here!

  6. I’d take Button’s comments with a pinch of salt, he does triathlons for fun after all.

    1. @geemac
      Yeah, don’t trust these guys, they’re wacko!
      (triathlete here)

  7. Oh no, why is Webber and F1fanatic doing anything to do with The Sun

    1. Impartiality…

  8. I will definitely follow FE more closely next year. Not only because I am Portuguese and will be able to follow DAC in a single seater again in a complete season. And I am not even a fan of street circuits, but at least they managed to create a good atmosphere around the series, I can easily catch the youtube streaming, the field looks very interesting ounce again, there are very few barriers if someone wants to follow the championship and a lot of content is available to the fans.

    Yes they still have fanboost (which at least makes the teams seek attention from the fans) and I don’t find the cars particularly interesting, but it is so simple and so easy for me to engage that makes me want to see as much as I can, and if possible sing along the national anthem.

  9. Lol easy for him to say.. Thriatlete, capable of close to olympic norm. Prpfessional F1 driver for 300 weekends now…

    Human Fitness once achieved to sufficient level does not decrease that quickly. For sure if he stoped doing ALL preparation some would be noticable in a few races.

    But if his hobbies include running, bike riding and swimming… With olympic friends… Well that is quite a workout.

  10. As far as COTD goes, I actually don’t like the new change because can’t we all see how it will go?

    Knowing standing starts can be unsafe, Charlie will keep the safety car out even longer than the already frustratingly too long amount of time he does. Then he’ll pull the cars up and do a standing start. I don’t think we’ll ever have a really dangerous standing start because even now, when conditions are pretty OK and good to go they always still err on the side of caution and don’t go for a few more laps. Given the extra danger they’ll wait even longer now I think.

    I get the idea which is to give the drama of a start at least, but I think it will likely not work because of two negative results:

    *3-5 more laps lost than usual of the race (9-10 behind safety car where normally it is 5 or 6).
    *A farcical far too Indy 2005 reminiscent start because for every standing start the track is going to be way into Inter territory and half or more of the grid will go straight into the pits at the end of the previous lap as they form up. There can’t be anything in the rules against this I wouldn’t imagine? After all it’s allowed after an actual warm-up lap now and in this case it will be a legitimate lap within the race. It’s fair game.

    You watch. This will be exactly how it goes down.

Comments are closed.