GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Scott on June 29, 2018, 07:01:12 PM
-
Really? After Facebook, Twitter and Google all horribly failed the user experience by using manipulative algorithms, now F1 is signing up for the same thing.
https://www.pitpass.com/62190/F1-appoints-Amazon-as-official-Cloud-and-Machine-Learning-Provider
-
Really? After Facebook, Twitter and Google all horribly failed the user experience by using manipulative algorithms, now F1 is signing up for the same thing.
https://www.pitpass.com/62190/F1-appoints-Amazon-as-official-Cloud-and-Machine-Learning-Provider
Is that a news article or a press release using fill in the blanks? 'Formula 1 Data Scientists'?
-
Is this for predicting the next penalty?
-
Corporate-speak. The kind that the Sales Department loves and the Programing Department laughs out loud at.
-
They've been using algorithms to run pit stop traffic lights and look where that's got some teams. ::)
Haas used human oversight to call, or is that shout, 'stop the car'! 'stop the car'! 'stop the car'! to prevent a car with loose front right wheel from making it out of the pits in practice.
No thanks to the algorithm controlled auto release system the car halted about 10yds from end of pit lane. :swoon:
Can't see human intervention easily correcting the machine when it chooses wrong strategy direction.
Mind you it could explain some of the nutty Merc and Ferrari strat calls over the past 18 months. :D
-
I wonder if an algorithm running in the background could have helped this decision. Probably yes since it was straightforward math.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/137153/mercedes-explains-painful-vsc-blunder
-
It seems that the VSC and Mercedes have become mortal enemies. Not the first time this season they have appeared to stare blankly at their monitors whilst other teams gain an advantage out of the situation.
-
It seems that the VSC and Mercedes have become mortal enemies. Not the first time this season they have appeared to stare blankly at their monitors whilst other teams gain an advantage out of the situation.
In fairness to Mercedes in this instance in Austria they were faced with a dilemma that the two chasing teams, especially Red Bull, did not have. If Merc pitted others would stay out and gain track position, if Lewis failed to pit they must - and did.
Lewis would lose the race lead in either scenario - damned if you do damned if you don't.
Who of us, including the race commentators who all roundly criticised Merc for not stopping without explaining the dilemma the race leader faced, would want that choice.
After all at that stage in the race no one could predict whether another safety car period would allow RBR in particular to pit without losing the lead, and that's ignoring the fact that Red Bull could play hare & tortoise to open the gap for lead car pit stop.
I guess it was pretty much a slam dunk that Ferrari would pit at that early VSC because they were on the ultrasofts near the end of their useful life. However they may have sacrificed Kimi, again, if Lewis pitted as a traffic calming measure. I also think Merc thought at that stage they had a pace advantage for Lewis to open his own pit stop window.
Suddenly this oh so simple Merc stat call doesn't look as easy as it appears, now does it????
-
I must admit that on occasion (okay, much of the time) I post tongue in cheek. So I am not entirely serious about Mercedes and their issues with the VSC. I would not fancy making the call when leading a race and having your other car break down. It is lose lose as whatever you do, the other teams will try to counter it in a bid to ruin your race and at that point, both Ferrari and Red Bull could have split their strategies to counter Hamilton.
The only time I am consistently serious is about Williams. ;)
-
Considering the race engineer was apologising on the radio for the bad call, I suppose they realised that regardless of the other factors, it would have been best to pit Lewis at the VSC. If the others had not pitted, Lewis would be on fresher tires and probably able to overtake the Ferraris and Bulls as their tires faded (if they hadn't also pitted, which I guess they probably would have anyway just to cover Lewis). For those following it was early enough in the race to stay conservative rather than gamble staying out.
Of course they have to consider many possibilities, but isn't that what their race engineers are supposed to have prepared in advance - as many scenarios as they can piece together at any point during the race to make the right call? Even they admitted they blundered it.
-
I would suggest that the radio call apologising was more about motivating Lewis to get on with the chase than to admit they had screwed up.
I also suggest we'd have had same whinge from Lewis, commentators et al, if Merc had stopped but the Bulls on supersofts, good for possibly 20 more laps, played a team game and opened a gap for one car to stop and get out ahead.
Normally a time loss on the softs v supersofts can be expected, not sure too many people knew for certain that the softs could equal & even surpass the lap times of supersofts. Most drivers only had 2 sets of softs for the whole weekend, some only 1 set. Hindsight is a marvellous thing. :D
-
In fairness to Mercedes in this instance in Austria they were faced with a dilemma that the two chasing teams, especially Red Bull, did not have. If Merc pitted others would stay out and gain track position, if Lewis failed to pit they must - and did.
Lewis would lose the race lead in either scenario - damned if you do damned if you don't.
Who of us, including the race commentators who all roundly criticised Merc for not stopping without explaining the dilemma the race leader faced, would want that choice.
Me. The others would have to stop later, and by failing to pit, it was missing the opportunity for a free pit stop. Moreover, probably the only pit stop to actually be necessary.
At worst (if another Safety Car had come out as Mercedes said they were trying to plan against), everyone got a free pit stop, in which case I'd still have a net advantage the length of my lead. At best, I might extend that lead.
-
In fairness to Mercedes in this instance in Austria they were faced with a dilemma that the two chasing teams, especially Red Bull, did not have. If Merc pitted others would stay out and gain track position, if Lewis failed to pit they must - and did.
Lewis would lose the race lead in either scenario - damned if you do damned if you don't.
Who of us, including the race commentators who all roundly criticised Merc for not stopping without explaining the dilemma the race leader faced, would want that choice.
Me. The others would have to stop later, and by failing to pit, it was missing the opportunity for a free pit stop. Moreover, probably the only pit stop to actually be necessary.
At worst (if another Safety Car had come out as Mercedes said they were trying to plan against), everyone got a free pit stop, in which case I'd still have a net advantage the length of my lead. At best, I might extend that lead.
Clearly the Mercedes wasn't handling the tires well. They must've also considered that if they brought Hamilton in that early they would have to stop again. While a VSC stop costs less time than a normal stop, it's not 'free'. If you have a choice between a VSC stop and a full speed stop, or just a single full speed stop, seems like a simple decision to me.
I do think the best thing to come out of the whole mess was Mercedes admitting they got it wrong though. It would be easy enough to go on about how difficult a decision it was, so kudos for just putting it behind them.
-
In fairness to Mercedes in this instance in Austria they were faced with a dilemma that the two chasing teams, especially Red Bull, did not have. If Merc pitted others would stay out and gain track position, if Lewis failed to pit they must - and did.
Lewis would lose the race lead in either scenario - damned if you do damned if you don't.
Who of us, including the race commentators who all roundly criticised Merc for not stopping without explaining the dilemma the race leader faced, would want that choice.
Me. The others would have to stop later, and by failing to pit, it was missing the opportunity for a free pit stop. Moreover, probably the only pit stop to actually be necessary.
At worst (if another Safety Car had come out as Mercedes said they were trying to plan against), everyone got a free pit stop, in which case I'd still have a net advantage the length of my lead. At best, I might extend that lead.
Clearly the Mercedes wasn't handling the tires well. They must've also considered that if they brought Hamilton in that early they would have to stop again. While a VSC stop costs less time than a normal stop, it's not 'free'. If you have a choice between a VSC stop and a full speed stop, or just a single full speed stop, seems like a simple decision to me.
What the others gained by staying out would have been lost when they inevitably lost ground and needed to pit not long afterwards. This is what made the stop free.
It's possible the race was not winnable from a strategic viewpoint, however I do not see any foreseeable configuration that a 1-stop strategy would have beaten a 2-stop, if the latter included a VSC stop - unless we are discussing a track like Monaco, where it is possible to block faster people into staying behind without breaking the regulations.