|
DRS is a 'solution' to the issue of cars not being able to overtake. Underlying this though is the question of whether that is down to the cars, or the tracks.
The cars have changed a lot over time, but the overall track characteristics have remained the same. It is easy to point the finger at the cars as being the problem, but is it the case that the tracks have not developed enough to match the cars? Consider the following statement: "The main criticism against Tilke’s tracks revolves around the fact that they are pretty much similar. They share common characteristics such as long straights with a slow turn at the end and more corners than deemed necessary.
These characteristics are said to make his circuits boring. Little to no overtaking is seen on these tracks, and the overall quality of the race, along with the excitement it brings, suffers as a result."
A couple of points come out of this. Firstly, a lot of fans expect circuits to be built with overtaking opportunities.
But one thing that stands out to me, in light of recent comments here - if the design of a circuit creates overtaking opportunities, is that not dictating where overtakes will happen?
The solution is not as simple as adding or removing DRS, or to change the cars to be more akin to previous designs. It has to consider the entirety of the package on the grid.
DRS is used because the cars do not match the circuits in use. The cars will not change much - because design and development of the last decades is locked in. Anything that makes them lighter, smaller or less aero-dependent will only see them moving towards resembling a lower formula. So I would advocate for a wholesale change in the track design before reviewing the necessity of DRS.
|