to withstand the time loss from worn tyre. The link stated above presents the application of game theory to number of pit stops that a driver should take for the optimal time. The author stated optimal time (ignoring the damage of tyre and etc.) to race 78 laps with only soft tyre. Then he compared the optimal time with resulting time from varying strategies in number of pit stops. Considering some chances of incidents in a race, he concluded a racer should take ²exibility in multiple pit stops for positive payoff. However, he also acknowledged the limitations in his model (Formula one teams uses huge data sets for predictions, but the outcome is always variable.) Sebastien Vettel’s one pit stop in 2011 earned him a victory in Monaco even though that’s not dominant strategy in Monaco Grand Prix. He lost much time from worn tyre, but he won because he had a pit stop in red ²ag. (This means other drivers had to slow down during the race because of safety issues while Vettel did not have to slow down because he took pit stop ) Some people say this kind of variances impede fairness of the race, because Vettel’s victory followed by his great luck. However, I say they make the race more interesting because they make the dominant strategy unpredictable. (at least by a man’s capability.) http://thegameisafoot.weebly.com/2/post/2012/03/the-game-theory-of-formula-1-winning-the-monaco-grand-prix.html
This is the end of the preview.
access the rest of the document.
Formula One, Pit Stop, Monaco Grand Prix, Circuit de Monaco, Sebastien Vettel