F1 overtakings 1983 to 2007

Wow - someone has way too much time on their hands (unless they log overtakes for each race?).

Be nice to see this for motogp

these F! cars are so wide these days i doubt most tracks are wide enought for passing

I thought there was a rule in F1 that forbade anyone overtaking!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Son of Doohan @ Jan 7 2008, 11:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I thought there was a rule in F1 that forbade anyone overtaking!

nah, they allowed to overtake, but only at 0mph or in the courtroom..........

They have made the cars a bit smaller for 2008 but with no TC look at all the downforce which is not gonna help!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BEN @ Jan 7 2008, 12:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Wow - someone has way too much time on their hands (unless they log overtakes for each race?).

Be nice to see this for motogp

Ask and ye shall receive.

The data goes back to the race at Mugello 2006


excludes:
a] any place changes due to a rider binning it
b] all lapping or unlapping manoeuvres
c] any place changes made during the warm up lap
d] any passes made by Pedrosa





Not bad, but the last lap was kind of an anti-climax.

That will be a short DVD.Except for pit strategy,when was the last time you saw someone pass for the lead in an F1 race.The racing is some of the worst in motorsports but i watch and follow for the technical end and the sound.

^ Shanghai 07. Kimi on Hamilton.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jan 7 2008, 05:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>these F! cars are so wide these days i doubt most tracks are wide enought for passing

Too wide? I think you're just used to motorcycles Rog.

F1 cars are much more narrow than they used to be. In the 80s, during the turbo and ground effects era, the cars were much wider. However, according to the graph, there was more overtaking back then.

It's simple: F1 has become too much about the technology. Institute a spec ECU, get rid of the ugly little widgets and appendages, and minimize or remove the wings. Bringing the driver back ino the equation and making the cars less aero sensitive will improve the racing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (phleg @ Jan 10 2008, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^ Shanghai 07. Kimi on Hamilton.

I purposely left this thread alone for 5 days to see how many instances people remembered a pass for the lead in an F1 race.We got 1.I did word it when was the last time you saw someone pass [on the track for the lead of a F1 race.So lets reword it.Without pit strategy or mechanical failure,from memory,name the passes for the lead that didnt come on the first lap of the race.Im going to go out on a limb and guess that over 70% of the time,the driver that sits on pole leads all laps except when pitting and wins the race.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Jan 15 2008, 07:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I purposely left this thread alone for 5 days to see how many instances people remembered a pass for the lead in an F1 race.We got 1.I did word it when was the last time you saw someone pass [on the track for the lead of a F1 race.So lets reword it.Without pit strategy or mechanical failure,from memory,name the passes for the lead that didnt come on the first lap of the race.Im going to go out on a limb and guess that over 70% of the time,the driver that sits on pole leads all laps except when pitting and wins the race.
Suzuka 2005, Raikkonen on Fisichella in the final lap. That was an amazing race, also by Alonso btw.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Jan 15 2008, 06:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I purposely left this thread alone for 5 days to see how many instances people remembered a pass for the lead in an F1 race.We got 1.I did word it when was the last time you saw someone pass [on the track for the lead of a F1 race.So lets reword it.Without pit strategy or mechanical failure,from memory,name the passes for the lead that didnt come on the first lap of the race.Im going to go out on a limb and guess that over 70% of the time,the driver that sits on pole leads all laps except when pitting and wins the race.
I think you're missing the point with F1. To appreciate it you can't view it in the same way you'd view MotoGP.

Despite what people will tell you about the late 80's and early 90's, there wasn't passing and repassing lap after lap, and none stop action. There was much more overtaking than there is currently, but it wasn't to the extent people seem to think, not NASCAR or MotoGP levels (well, the levels of the 990 era). The difference back then was that there was geniune differences between the cars, much more freedom for engineers, and designers to innovate. You had a good mix of privateer teams all fighting in pre-qualifying just to make it to the grid.

Nowadays, the designers are so restricted that the cars are almost identical, the privateers are almost non-existant bar Williams, Red Bull, Toro Rosso and Force India (can't really call McLaren a privateer due to Mercedes heavy involvement), and the manufacturers rule the sport. Every time the governing body impose a new restriction, not only does it detract from the sport, but it means that the funds originally used are just diverted elsewhere, spending hundreds of millions in development for a 2bhp power increase. The small teams just can't compete with that.

At some point, a decision needs to be made about what Formula One should be, because the whole thing is getting rediculous. This just doesn't seem like Formula One anymore, it's moving almost towards a spec formula. We are now facing a 5-year engine freeze, which means a complete shutdown on development. That money will most likely be diverted to some other small area, resulting in a minimal, but crucial gain for the big teams. Meanwhile, the little teams get left behind.

If the rules were lightened up a little, allowing different engine formats through a fuel limited formula, and the chassis regulations were lightened a bit, the smaller teams would be able to use innovation rather than budget to beat the big guys. This can be done, as Ducati have shown this season in MotoGP, which has much more freedom than Formula One. It'd also mean more exciting racing, as more variation in performance, and different strengths in different areas, would mean many more overtaking opportunities.

But anyway, back to my original point about overtaking. Two things that in my opinion would be nessacary to bring overtaking back to Formula One, are slick tyres, and a control Ground Effect undertray. Slicks allow much more mechanical grip to the driver, and don't suffer from graining effects like Grooved tyres do. A Ground Effect undertray provides under-body aero that isn't affected by the turbulent air when following another car. GP2 uses GEU and the results speak for themselves, although slicks, and much cleaner aero are also contributing factors.

Theres much talk at the moment of banning winglets, control front and rear wings, etc, but at what cost do we want more overtaking in F1? The sport isn't just about the best drivers in the fastest cars, it's about innovation too. I think Colin Chapman, god bless him, would despise what the sport is becoming.

Le Mans has very little overtaking. Audi win it every bloody year. But imo, its still the greatest race on earth. Because it has character, and innovation. Group C Sportscars were awesome for the same reason. This is where Formula One has gone astray.

This brings me back to my original point, Formula One isn't, and was never, about lots and lots of overtaking. Some overtaking, but not lots. But the racing WAS exciting, despite this. Because it had genuine character. You could visually see and hear the differences in the cars, the different approaches taken. The drivers were personalities, not media fed moguls and hype machines. Nothing against Lewis Hamilton, but I just can't help thinking half the things he says have been scripted by the McLaren PR department. Despite what sponsors think, that doesn't help sell their product. It had much more unpredictability. Much more panache. It was Formula One.

Whether we'll ever get Formula One back, remains to be seen.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Orrmate @ Jan 15 2008, 04:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think you're missing the point with F1. To appreciate it you can't view it in the same way you'd view MotoGP.

Despite what people will tell you about the late 80's and early 90's, there wasn't passing and repassing lap after lap, and none stop action. There was much more overtaking than there is currently, but it wasn't to the extent people seem to think, not NASCAR or MotoGP levels (well, the levels of the 990 era). The difference back then was that there was geniune differences between the cars, much more freedom for engineers, and designers to innovate. You had a good mix of privateer teams all fighting in pre-qualifying just to make it to the grid.

Nowadays, the designers are so restricted that the cars are almost identical, the privateers are almost non-existant bar Williams, Red Bull, Toro Rosso and Force India (can't really call McLaren a privateer due to Mercedes heavy involvement), and the manufacturers rule the sport. Every time the governing body impose a new restriction, not only does it detract from the sport, but it means that the funds originally used are just diverted elsewhere, spending hundreds of millions in development for a 2bhp power increase. The small teams just can't compete with that.

At some point, a decision needs to be made about what Formula One should be, because the whole thing is getting rediculous. This just doesn't seem like Formula One anymore, it's moving almost towards a spec formula. We are now facing a 5-year engine freeze, which means a complete shutdown on development. That money will most likely be diverted to some other small area, resulting in a minimal, but crucial gain for the big teams. Meanwhile, the little teams get left behind.

If the rules were lightened up a little, allowing different engine formats through a fuel limited formula, and the chassis regulations were lightened a bit, the smaller teams would be able to use innovation rather than budget to beat the big guys. This can be done, as Ducati have shown this season in MotoGP, which has much more freedom than Formula One. It'd also mean more exciting racing, as more variation in performance, and different strengths in different areas, would mean many more overtaking opportunities.

But anyway, back to my original point about overtaking. Two things that in my opinion would be nessacary to bring overtaking back to Formula One, are slick tyres, and a control Ground Effect undertray. Slicks allow much more mechanical grip to the driver, and don't suffer from graining effects like Grooved tyres do. A Ground Effect undertray provides under-body aero that isn't affected by the turbulent air when following another car. GP2 uses GEU and the results speak for themselves, although slicks, and much cleaner aero are also contributing factors.

Theres much talk at the moment of banning winglets, control front and rear wings, etc, but at what cost do we want more overtaking in F1? The sport isn't just about the best drivers in the fastest cars, it's about innovation too. I think Colin Chapman, god bless him, would despise what the sport is becoming.

Le Mans has very little overtaking. Audi win it every bloody year. But imo, its still the greatest race on earth. Because it has character, and innovation. Group C Sportscars were awesome for the same reason. This is where Formula One has gone astray.

This brings me back to my original point, Formula One isn't, and was never, about lots and lots of overtaking. Some overtaking, but not lots. But the racing WAS exciting, despite this. Because it had genuine character. You could visually see and hear the differences in the cars, the different approaches taken. The drivers were personalities, not media fed moguls and hype machines. Nothing against Lewis Hamilton, but I just can't help thinking half the things he says have been scripted by the McLaren PR department. Despite what sponsors think, that doesn't help sell their product. It had much more unpredictability. Much more panache. It was Formula One.

Whether we'll ever get Formula One back, remains to be seen.

I agree with what your saying but it has gotten to the point where you can watch qualifying and forget the race because that is the race.Passing has become almost non existant.I was hoping someone would do it for me but they didnt so here is some stats.

Out of 17 races last year,

11 were won from the pole with the leader only giving up the lead during pits
2 races finished with the pole setter finishing 2nd
1 race finished with pole setter finishing 3rd
2 races ended where pole setter dnf and was leading at the time of trouble
1 race ended with pole setter finishing 2nd due to slowing and faking running wide so teammate could pass and win title.

I wasnt far off with my guess of 70% and had it not been for a couple of DNF's and a calculated drive by it would have been over 80%

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Jan 16 2008, 01:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually what people tell you is true! Download some of the old 80's races and have a look. A few years ago I began to wonder whether my recollection of much better racing back then was a case of rose tinted specs. So I watched some of the old races and found that actually there was lots more overtaking, especially for the podium placings, and the action and excitement was massively better.
I've got DVD's of, and seen, plenty of races from the 80's, and the season reviews. The Ground Effect era was fantastic for overtaking, and for me the most exciting in those terms, but as I said, it wasn't at MotoGP or NASCAR levels, like people sometimes claim. It was very exciting, and ten fold better than what we have now, but people do still exxagerate about the old days, you still got the odd procession.

The European GP this season was just as exciting as anything I've seen from the 80's. As was Suzuka 2005. F1 can still produce 80's-like excitement on its day. It just happened more often in the 80's, which is what the FIA need to sort out. The fact that wet races instantly seem to provide better racing due to less marbles, seems to suggest that Bernie's idea of sweeping the track on Saturday night is a simple but brilliant idea.

The point behind my rather rambled post earlier is that I think people slamming F1 for its lack of overtaking are looking at it the wrong way. Don't get me wrong, it IS an issue, and desperately needs sorting out. But F1 never has, and never will be, a championship with an abundance of overtaking. Comparing with bikes, the fact is, its naturally much more difficult to overtake in cars. Unfortunately, the governing body is also taking away the thing that made F1; ingenuety and innovation. Which in my opinion, is a big part of the problem.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>As far as rules go, in 1995/6 both Damon Hill and Alain Prost said the way to bring back exciting racing with decent amounts of overtaking was big sticky tyres, more horsepower, less driver aids, limited aerodynamics and no refuelling. Perhaps we should try that.
They're evaluating slicks, which almost certainly would see an increase in overtaking. Limiting aero could work, but brings into question the integrity of what should be an almost unlimited formula. No refuelling, although it sounds attractive, also has issues of its own. To have a racing car carrying 220 litres of fuel can have disastrous consequences, as Niki Lauda and Gerhard Berger would testify. It is possible if they limited fuel flow or tank size, but I fear with the move to biofuel, which is an inevitable one, it's unlikely.

In the early 80s I can recall alan jones overtaking 3 cars in the one move and a driver (?watson) winning from 17th on the grid in a dry race. As I have said previously, I think the modern aerodynamics have been the main contributor to the death of passing, where far from being able to slipstream like the old days getting close to the car in front puts you in dirty air. Also in the late 70s/early 80s F1 was basically formula cosworth with all the contenders using the cosworth F1 engine, apart from the french turbos which were hand grenades, so I guess the cars were more even to start off with.