Short shrift given to mandatory two-stop idea as F1 fans vote

Mandatory two-stop races in F1 is one idea understood to be put to discussion at the next F1 Commission meeting, as the sport looks for ways to impove the viewing spectacle moving forwards.

With only one stop mandatory in dry conditions under the current rules, this move would have a significant impact on team strategies, but we asked for your opinion on the idea, and you replied in droves.

F1 fans vote against mandatory two-stop race idea in PF1 poll

We put the vote to you earlier this week, and at time of writing, almost 2000 responses have been gathered to whether or not such a move would be a good or bad idea.

As it stands, 60% of our readers voted against the idea, while 40% believe it would be a good idea. These results are subject to change, of course, should further votes be cast.

We also asked for your thoughts in the comments section on our website and on social media, and remember, if you want to be considered for future editions of the PlanetF1 Postbox, leave a comment on our stories or you can email planetf1editor@planetsport.com, with the subject line ‘PF1 Postbox’.

With that, here is just a glimpse of what some of you had to say on the matter:

More as we look ahead to the Sao Paulo GP weekend

👉 Perez makes Max Verstappen title prediction with McLaren ‘messing around’

👉 F1 weather forecast: Unsettled Sao Paulo GP weekend predicted

Antony Gregory: Mandatory 2 stop is good idea. If all 3 tyre compounds are also mandatory.

Phillip Cogswell: With only one tire manufacturer, 2 mandatory stops will change nothing.

Chris Marsden: Would be the end of the phrase “the tire whisperer”.

Phil Newstead: I think we should go back to letting the teams pick their own strategy, it they feel they can go the whole race on one tyre then let them do so.

Harold Kwok: Motor racing is about how good a driver is. Adding more pitstops will distract from that and put more importance in others, such as the pit crew, etc. This will subsequently degrade motor racing.

Guinn Patten: What F1 needs is less gimmicks and more freedom to innovate. It’s becoming more and more a spec series. Remove all branding and you can hardly tell a Red Bull from a Sauber. Turn the engineers loose and see what they come up with.

SLOTURBO: Dry Race: Have to use each compound once. The tires are already there, and it would bring the “whole team” into the race. It would be better for fans to watch the race (on TV) and see those pit stops.

NDG49: I voted Yes, only because it allows the teams to develop strategies which can allow a driver to jump ahead if the team pulls them in at the right time. Also, the entire team gets into the fray when they perform a great 2 sec tire change. It is more exciting. I understand that 1-stop races can be exciting as well, but then drivers are then able to just run away with the race. I would also allow teams to not be forced to use different compounds at each tire change. Keep it exciting. I yearn for multiple tire manufacturers, but we all know fiascos can occur, as at Indy in 2005.

Jojo: No it’s a terrible idea. Everyone would end up on the same strategies more or less. It can be quite intriguing to watch and see whether teams can make the one stop work when others have gone for the two stop or vice versa.

Conto Dorro: No. Having one mandatory stop isn’t great either. The teams should be allowed to make however many stops they think will allow them to win – be it no stops on hard tyres to try and make it to the end or three stops for very softs to go as quickly as possible.

Alexandra Peller: There are better ways of encouraging mixed strategies.

The Btcc had a system a few years ago where you had to start the first race of each weekend on each compound of tyre 3 times across the year.

That could easily be adopted to f1 and would add a layer of strategy in across the season.

Kumba: It could work, but next year the difference in performance might be as big as back in 2014. And 2 stops won’t make racing more interesting necessarely.

Also, some races were very exciting despite having mainly a 1 stop.

Hans Schmidt: Still think using all three compounds is the way to go, with the proviso you have to use each compound for a minimum no of laps. This is to prevent teams doing an out lap and then dumping their least favourable compound. Now it becomes a engineering problem again, optimising the setup for three compounds. I still think the idea that everyone will do the same thing is not true, all cars do not perform equally well or badly on the same compound.

Richard Gosling: In principal I agree – my instincts are always in favour of letting the teams do what they want rather than imposing ever more restrictions.

The main problem with this idea is only briefly mentioned – “Until Pirelli has tweaked the compounds in terms of performance and longevity to make it such that all three options are, in a straightforward race, roughly equal…” This is a hell of a challenge for Pirelli, to come up with three different compounds that will give more-or-less the same outcome. If Pirelli can’t manage this, then we are still in the situation where everyone chooses the same strategy.

Read next: Fan-designed helmet chosen for Sao Paulo GP as Ocon reveals change