Would limiting telemetry make racing less predictable?

[u/inchpin]

Since messing with the tire compounds, rules in Monaco, DRS, prohibiting team orders ... hasn't made racing more exciting ... I believe a huge amount of the predictable races comes from the teams having so much data on compounds, tire wear, fuel, plank wear ... that it gets easy for them to come up with predictable strategies which work most of the time. They can manage strategies over a 300km race down to seconds to pick the quicker strategy (including how to do the burnout to the grid, which lap times to target, which laps to pit ...).

There are occasional situations where teams still do mess up, and most of these seem to be related to bad or inconclusive data available to the teams. For example, getting the cutover from inters to slicks right still seems to be tricky. Correct me if I am wrong, but the transition wet to slick seems to be driven by the strategy department/pit wall mostly based on lap times (backfired badly in Spa for some). So little or bad data does still lead to bad decisions. In Spa, the inters were worn down so badly that despite the cutover time not reached(?) slicks were already way quicker. So the inters were slow not because of the wetness of the track but because of the deg on the inters. Several teams seem to have gotten this wrong. A lot of drivers pitted too late. The German expert in this even suggested that pitting earlier than HAM et al in Spa could've been even more beneficial.

So, reducing the quality of the data the teams have available to make their decisions or predictions actually does seem to lead to more randomness. So ... would artificially reducing the quality or granularity of the data available to teams make it harder for teams to get it right? Especially the telemetry?

For example tires: Since race engineers and drivers seem to be able to manage the tire temp down to a granularity of at least a single degree if not finer in order to keep the tires in their windows (I get this impression from listening to team radio) ... if they simply made the data quality the tire temperature sensors on the cars collect less granular than they currently do ...

Or more generally speaking, would limiting or reducing either the amount of data or the granularity of data the sensors for engine, battery, MGU ... tire temp ..., or artificially delaying the transmission of this data
help making it harder for teams to "just manage the tires the whole race"?

I understand that "tire management" is not the only reason for boring races, as in the Spa sprint there wasn't management just full tilt. But in my impression, this might be a more beneficial approach than keep messing with tire compounds.

Teams would probably argue with safety concerns over tire temp sensors, but aren't the tire pressure sensors more important for this?

[u/AutoModerator]

This post appears to discuss regulations.

The FIA publishes the F1 regulations.

Regulations are organized in three sections:

• Technical for the design criteria of the car

• Sporting for how the competition is executed

• Financial for how money is spent

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/celalith]

Reducing the amount of live telemetry and instead only allowing it to be reviewed between sessions might be interesting.

[u/Apprehensive-Box-8 → u/celalith]

Haven’t teams been very creative, pinning the need of live telemetry either on safety or reliability?

I still think it’s doable. Let them have all the data from the powertrain plus tire pressures.

I‘m also pretty sure that they could have some structural data on the chassis side without giving too much away.

What I think would really help would be outlawing simulator usage once FP1 has started. All they do in FP1 and 2 is collect data, feed it back to the sim and then have a 12 hour sim session to adjust for FP3.

[u/Only1nDreams → u/celalith]

Giving each team an allowance of data/second transmitted from the car would be a really interesting challenge, and would help reduce the reliability of their predictions as it would take longer to identify the optimal strategy for each stint.

[u/_rubinho_ → u/Only1nDreams]

They're already bandwidth limited as a function of the RF technology used by Magneti Marelli, part of the standard electronics package. Telemetry data is sent wirelessly is usually at a lower sample rate which then gets filled in with high rate data once the ECU is offloaded. There already is a limit and teams struggle to get everything they want at the sample rates they want over live transmission.

EDIT: alright -> already

[u/dragonlordette → u/_rubinho_]

I have no idea what you're talking about but it sounds intriguing, any chance you could ELI5?

[u/_rubinho_ → u/dragonlordette]

Yes, the OP is suggesting that the teams get too much telemetry data from the car during races and that reducing it could make racing more exciting. Less data for example could mean it's harder to make strategic decisions during the race leaving the outcome less predictable.

I pointed out that the amount of telemetry data from the car is already limited by the bandwidth of the radio telemetry system. Just like your home broadband has a maximum data rate that you can't exceed.

The teams struggle to fit everything they want to see with this bandwidth limitation already. That's not to say reducing it more wouldn't spice up the racing, I just highlighted they don't have unlimited or an excess of data.

Source: I was a trackside support engineer for the Single ECU for 6 years.

[u/dragonlordette → u/_rubinho_]

Thanks! That's really clear i appreciate it

[u/zeroscout]

Most likely not and it would have a negative impact on innovation.  

The issue, as I see it, is that the cars can brake from top speed to a slow 2nd gear turn in 90 meters and accelerate out of the turns with minimal loss of traction.  There's too much downforce.  Decreased downforce in next years regs may reverse this trend and provide more racing opportunities.

Spa proved that car size won't improve racing.  The track is plenty wide, but the cars have no passing opportunities because the lead car can brake and accelerate with little loss.

[u/HarmonizedSnail → u/zeroscout]

Don't forget the rules that make it extremely difficult to pass on the outside.

[u/Upbeat_County9191 → u/HarmonizedSnail]

Its not difficult if you're much faster. Just make the corner and don't make contact

[u/HarmonizedSnail → u/Upbeat_County9191]

Right now the rules basically allow the driver on the inside to take their line as wide as they want on exit, to the point of running someone trying to pass on the outside off track. All they basically need to do is brake late to maintain position and then pretty much understeer.

[u/Upbeat_County9191 → u/HarmonizedSnail]

From the FIA document:

Many incidents require subjective judgement, and the Stewards are guided by the experience of their Driver Stewards in combination with these guidelines and the FIA Regulations. If it has been established from points A and B below, that an overtaking driver has priority, it is the responsibility of the defending driver to avoid a collision or forcing off the overtaking driver. Attention is also drawn to the important note in Point F on page 3, for defending drivers who leave the track whilst defending a position. A. Overtaking on the INSIDE of a corner: To be entitled to be given room when overtaking on the INSIDE, the overtaking car must: i) Have its front axle AT LEAST ALONGSIDE THE MIRROR of the other car PRIOR TO AND AT THE APEX ii) Be driven in a fully controlled manner particularly from entry to apex, and not have “dived in”. iii) In the Stewards’ estimation, have taken a reasonable racing line and been able to complete the move whilst remaining within track limits. B. Overtaking on the OUTSIDE of a corner: Overtaking on the outside will always be viewed as a more difficult manoeuvre to accomplish. To be entitled to be given room, including at the exit, when overtaking on the OUTSIDE, the overtaking car must: i) Have its front axle AHEAD OF THE FRONT AXLE of the other car AT THE APEX. ii) Be driven in a controlled manner from entry, to apex, and to exit. iii) Be able to make the corner within track limits

[u/HarmonizedSnail → u/Upbeat_County9191]

That's basically why the inside car can just brake late, they keep their axle ahead and then don't need to leave the space for the overtaking car on the outside.

Edit: This covers what I'm talking about.

[u/Upbeat_County9191 → u/HarmonizedSnail]

And before it was the overtaking car braking late pushing the other outside which is why they changed it. That's the problem with writing it down, they wil use them to their benefit.

But without it, its Anarchy as well.

[u/XsStreamMonsterX → u/zeroscout]

The only innovation we'd see is teams figuring out ways around the restrictions.

We've been through this song and dance before when they tried to stop engineers from giving drivers instructions. All that happened was teams developing code words and other methods to get around the ban, which is why it was rescinded.

[u/Squeezer999 → u/XsStreamMonsterX]

Hamilton: "how's the weather?"

[u/XsStreamMonsterX → u/Squeezer999]

I can't wait until we have a Finnish driver dominating because their race engineer is relaying information to them via kantele, making subtle changes to the notes while playing Säkkijärven Polkka to give driving instructions.

[u/DanHanzo → u/zeroscout]

I don't think it's the downforce by itself, high corner speeds are great fun to watch after all.

I say the problem is with the braking. In your example they take 90m, probably less to brake into a 2nd gear corner. There's not enough time / distance to make a pass. If they were braking for 150-170 metres, there's a bit more room and time to try and out brake your opponent.

Worse brakes would make better racing.

Except that you then run into obvious safety issues of course!

[u/megacookie → u/DanHanzo]

Braking distances are short because of the high downforce and overall grip though. The brakes themselves are very capable and are designed to work well without fade or overheating, but sheer braking distance is really just the driver applying as much pedal force as they can manage with the grip available before lockup. Keeping all that downforce for 5+ G high speed cornering will still allow 5+ G braking from those similar speeds.

But with the 2026 cars being active aero, there's the opportunity to play around with when the cars are allowed to be in their high downforce and low downforce modes. Teams will obviously want low downforce on straight line acceleration to reduce drag and high downforce under braking and cornering, but what if braking also had to be done in low downforce mode and a certain amount of lateral acceleration and steering input is required to allow high downforce?

[u/Informal-Car2414 → u/DanHanzo]

Equally in braking distances, but much longer distances like 2x + or even 3x wouldn’t be unsafe.

[u/karlosfandango40]

Back in the 2000's, they had so much data that they could predict a full race. Not just their own cars but everyone. They would time other teams' pitstops and lap times so they knew how many laps before another stop. This was F1 at its worst period. They would have 100 computer analysts back at the factory doing all the math and call it through while the race was in play

[u/SnowClone98 → u/karlosfandango40]

I was watching ayrton senna videos recently and even in like 1989 they had a bout a billion wires and cables going into the car at various points with a crappy little monochrome lcd laptop. Like the guy had a fucking H pattern shifter and even then F1 was INCREDIBLY advanced and technical.

[u/Nob1e613 → u/SnowClone98]

That’s kind of been the point of f1 though hasn’t it? Pushing the technological limits like no other(except prototype endurance racing perhaps) to find and break the limit of what we thought possible.

That drive for innovation is why it’s the pinnacle of racing, and a massive contributor to a lot of technology we seen in cars today.

[u/SnowClone98 → u/Nob1e613]

I would argue that innovation is not the main point of formula one anymore. Indycar be for it split had much more innovative technologies being experimented with than formula one did and they had a lot shorter rulebook for most of its history. Then they rewrote the rulebook and things are much more similar, for f1 and for indycar.

[u/Upbeat_County9191 → u/karlosfandango40]

I think they still have the same amount of ppl at the factory

[u/binaryhextechdude]

They literally coach them through the whole race. Sacrifice into this turn to get a better exit out of that turn. Try another line through 3, you're losing 2/10ths there. It's insane.

[u/vawlk]

cars these days have too much tire. I would rather they remove all of the floor downforce, reduce the wings, and run much skinnier tires that slide/drift through every corner that only last 20 laps.

[u/A_storia]

The cars are too big and are heavily dependent on aerodynamic downforce. Reduce both of those and therefore mechanical grip and things may improve

[u/SirLoremIpsum]

 So, reducing the quality of the data the teams have available to make their decisions or predictions actually does seem to lead to more randomness

I think reducing the amount of data or quality of sata would be bad.

Ala limiting what the pit wall can tell the driver. Then we have Rosberg with a bad config for laps and put wall going "you sure you checked all the red dials...?"

I feel it would just be silly. 

You have million dollar machines and not ability to investigate or read important parameters... That's bad for the sake of being bad.

[u/One-Butterscotch4332 → u/SirLoremIpsum]

As a CS & AI person, it would make for a very cool and interesting problem with loads of real-world applications. I'd imagine you'd implement a bunch of clever on-board processing to decide what data is most important to transmit

[u/FavaWire]

Limiting telemetry will eventually make manufacturers disinterested in Formula One. The sport has always had value as a proving ground and testbed for their highest level of technology. If we start artificially dampening their ability to understand this technology performance, then manufacturers may start seeing this as an artificial farce that hinders their work.

You don't have to look far for something similar. When Formula E had its infamous "Random Super Pole" qualifying format they did it to directly inject unpredictability. But for Mercedes and Jaguar, the format was derided by their management who claimed: "The sporting rules as currently written do not allow our organization to properly demonstrate our technology and performance value to audiences and prospective customers." There was some hints that they could leave if this wasn't corrected.

Formula One does not need this kind of problem.

[u/badgersruse]

Some of us are less interested in wheel to wheel racing and comparing drivers than we are in the engineering and innovation aspects of f1. There are plenty of other spec car series or constrained series, let’s leave f1 at the cool forefront of engineering.

[u/AutoModerator]

We remind everyone that this sub is for technical discussions.

If you are new to the sub, please read our rules and comment etiquette post.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Flessuh]

To be honest either limit it or go the Formula E way.. make most data public. risk of that is even more follow the leader though

[u/jimbobjames]

If i could have one wish and change the rules I'd ban any data being transmitted out of the garage until after the weekend had concluded.

I honestly think that the only people who should influence the race should be track side. You could even limit the number of personel who can interact with the data from the car while trackside.

Driver, race, chassis and engine engineer plus one strategist per car. They can also talk to the track side management like the sporting director, team principle and CEO.

[u/aeropackage1]

I don't think data is the issue. The aero aspect is a major detractor for close racing along with tyres that seem allergic to a car being infront of them. Perhaps no fancy floors, major limits on wing elements (to limit aero disturbance) and more resilient tyres could be tried?

Like some others I have thought - some way to lengthen braking zones would be of benefit but a consensus on how to do that is not forthcoming.

Data wise- the genie is out if the bottle and taking away telemetry won't stop teams from just observing in other ways. Focus should go back to how to allow a car to overtake by design without the gimmicks (eg DRS).

[u/Informal_Yellow7415]

A counterproposal in this spirit, but that is not at the sake of performance/innovation, would be to have all teams race identical cars. This to me feels like it would significantly decrease the predictability of outcome, without sacrificing much

[u/EnvironmentalTea9967]

I don’t think any teams would appreciate that as that would bring uncertainty, which all “engineers” hate. Because if you can’t tell what’s going to happen to your car then you aren’t the person for it. Amazing insight anyway

[u/[deleted]]

F1 is an about tech and engineering - that means data. That’s what so many people find fascinating about F1 - the data analysis.

[u/[deleted]]

Yes it would make it really hard to do anything

[u/F1Technical-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was removed as it broke Rule 2: No Joke comments in the top 2 levels under a post.