Are the pit-stop strategies (for both tyres and fuel) part of the technical competitiveness which is characteristic of F1? What do you think?
Related Product:
F1 Racing - AustraliaF1 Racing is Australia's most popular motorsport magazine. It offers feature articles, interviews, driver profiles, and coverage of competitions, events, and the latest racing news from around the world.
Posted February 9th, 2010 in F1 FAQ by admin 
Fuel stops do add more to F1 in terms of strategic interest, but i think no refueling will give the drivers a tougher test.
First, they’ll have to think about fuel management, drive like a loony and you’ll run out of juice, it happened quite often in the 80’s.
Second, they’ll have a massive variation in the cars handling during the course of a race, carrying more than 100kg of fuel at the start could make for a pretty nasty car and some drivers will cope better with that than others.
Third, Tyre management will be more critical than ever, those heavy fuel loads will no doubt kill tyre’s given half a chance.
Overall I’m for the change, and not just for financial reasons, I think it will require more ability from the drivers, which is a good thing. Although Christos’ point about the grass being greener is very true.
In Formula one as in the rest of the world the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
Whenever there was refueling people believed that banning it would improve the racing, when there was not, they believed that introducing it would make for more interesting racing.
So it has come and gone but the racing hasn’t improved or worsened.
Personally I believe it’s a good strategic element that adds to the show, and not responsible for the lack of overtaking that people have always complained about in F1.
Should it stay or should it go?
I believe it has to go in the interests of cost cutting.
Refueling is an expensive practice for teams, buying and maintaining the refueling equipment and most importantly ferrying it around the world.
It also makes things that much more complicated for smaller teams.
So, to answer the original question, because cost cutting is a necessary step to improve and maintain the health of F1 in what is a difficult period for the sport, banning refueling should,at least indirectly,do quite a bit of good to the sport.
There are plus and cons and arguments on both sides regarding keeping it or banning it when it comes to the racing but as far as I’m concerned it’s the cost that is the important issue here.
In the end it may not show, we are used to taking some things for granted, F1 has and will remain alive through hard work and correct decision making of all those involved.
Despite all the whining and moaning that go with the territory, what we get in the end is the end result of all that.
So there’s little glory in cutting costs but sometimes it’s necessary and for the better.
It will be like the Senna, Prost era. It will be better and more awesome. The Tyre change will still be there though
If F1 banned refueling I think it would get somewhat boring.
It doesn’t matter if it’s good for the sport.
If I want it is all that matters.