Time for Reverse Grids in F1?
Discussion
Plenty of well documented issues in the sport with some lack of "entertainment" and many discussions over the merits of Lewis/Fred/Kimi's racing and overtaking skills being on show versus Seb's "boring" constant winning from the front and what it's doing to the sport. Plenty of rumblings of de ja vu from the Schumacher/Bridgestone era except this time the FIA are trying to artificially, successfully but unpopularly trying to screw with the racing by dicking around with tyres.
Is the solution to all this reverse grids from the last results?
Tell Pirelli to build a proper tyre and let them go balls-to-the-wall?
Discuss?
Is the solution to all this reverse grids from the last results?
Tell Pirelli to build a proper tyre and let them go balls-to-the-wall?
Discuss?
They need to bite the bullet, impose the budget cap, and open up the regulations. Red Bull have become very good at reading the rules and finding stuff in them, but if there was a bit more freedom I think other teams would find solutions too. But we'd need the budget cap to stop things becoming insanely expensive and pricing out everyone apart from Ferrari.
Pointless anyhow. Can you magine how many of the leading cars suddenly develop technical problems meaning they set a lap time of 10m 59.097s, meaning they qualified dead last....only to find themself on race day with an empty track in front of them and- mysteriosuly- a compleately cured car.
Reverse grids are a last roll of the dice to inject some excitement for an uneducated (to the sport) crowd, it has nothing to do with sport, Same goes for weight penalties etc for winning.
I'll be honest, apart from one constant, F1 finishing orders have been reasonably varied this season, to my mind anyway - I think the real question people are asking in regards to these things is "how do my stop Vettel wining all the time".
It seems this most recent 'scandal' started by Minardi about Redbull and 'traction control' might be the key to their dominance, maybe not - but it seems it's legal, and I'd put money on all the big teams doing something similar next season, maybe with the turbos rather than cutting cylinders.
I'll be honest, apart from one constant, F1 finishing orders have been reasonably varied this season, to my mind anyway - I think the real question people are asking in regards to these things is "how do my stop Vettel wining all the time".
It seems this most recent 'scandal' started by Minardi about Redbull and 'traction control' might be the key to their dominance, maybe not - but it seems it's legal, and I'd put money on all the big teams doing something similar next season, maybe with the turbos rather than cutting cylinders.
williamp said:
Pointless anyhow. Can you magine how many of the leading cars suddenly develop technical problems meaning they set a lap time of 10m 59.097s, meaning they qualified dead last....only to find themself on race day with an empty track in front of them and- mysteriosuly- a compleately cured car.
A simple answer to that - although I'm no supporter of reverse grids - is to have the grid aligned in reverse order to their position in the table. The first race to start in reverse number order. There are many solutions to equal pints of course.My solution is not to mess around with the arrangement of the deck chairs but to hit at the route cause of the lack of excitement.
I want to see racing. I want to see proper overtaking. I want to, within limits, see the best driver being able to compete with others. So why don't we:
Have the plans for each car available to the other teams after the race. Have the aerodynamic requirement that the air behind a car is stable. Limit wing size at the front to about a square foot. Do away with DRS. It is, in effect, a confession that the aero rules are faulty. Do not engineer the tyres to fail.
I don't want to see forumla Ford, just some exciting racing.
Derek Smith said:
williamp said:
Pointless anyhow. Can you magine how many of the leading cars suddenly develop technical problems meaning they set a lap time of 10m 59.097s, meaning they qualified dead last....only to find themself on race day with an empty track in front of them and- mysteriosuly- a compleately cured car.
A simple answer to that - although I'm no supporter of reverse grids - is to have the grid aligned in reverse order to their position in the table. The first race to start in reverse number order. There are many solutions to equal pints of course.My solution is not to mess around with the arrangement of the deck chairs but to hit at the route cause of the lack of excitement.
I want to see racing. I want to see proper overtaking. I want to, within limits, see the best driver being able to compete with others. So why don't we:
Have the plans for each car available to the other teams after the race. Have the aerodynamic requirement that the air behind a car is stable. Limit wing size at the front to about a square foot. Do away with DRS. It is, in effect, a confession that the aero rules are faulty. Do not engineer the tyres to fail.
I don't want to see forumla Ford, just some exciting racing.
Because the second part of your post i really disagree with. The whole point of reverse grids would be to try and eliminate the need for complex technical regs enforced by the the FIA. This is F1, they shouldn't be that limited.
In fact there's only one issue I can see, Monaco.
You shouldn't have to force good racing by using gimicks. Reverse grids, DRS and high wear tyres are all gimicks. As are weighting successful cars in the BTCC.
What is needed is a set of regulations that allow for more diversity in the cars. Currently the regulations are too tight and send all the designers in the same direction, resulting in the car with the best designer/team with the fastest car. There's very little opportunity for a bit of left field thinking.
Of course the other problem is that motor racing has now become about the "show" and getting as many spectators as possible. The organisers will do what generates the biggest viewing figures, so that they can generate bigger revenues, even if that is at the cost of "pure" racing. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy F1 enormously at the moment, but in the back of my mind is always the feeling that in some respects it's a bit false in places.
What is needed is a set of regulations that allow for more diversity in the cars. Currently the regulations are too tight and send all the designers in the same direction, resulting in the car with the best designer/team with the fastest car. There's very little opportunity for a bit of left field thinking.
Of course the other problem is that motor racing has now become about the "show" and getting as many spectators as possible. The organisers will do what generates the biggest viewing figures, so that they can generate bigger revenues, even if that is at the cost of "pure" racing. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy F1 enormously at the moment, but in the back of my mind is always the feeling that in some respects it's a bit false in places.
Shuffling the grid works in Touring Car racing, but that suits the nature of the championship. Easier to pass (less aero dependent), more pushing and shoving permitted and the ethos of the series is more about entertainment ....but in F1 it should be about meritocracy and rewarding , not handicapping, excellence.
Ignore Vettel, and the Korean GP was a very good race.
Without Seb, we'd have seen a capivating defence of a possible first GP win from Grosjean - holding off Hanilton and Kimi until he made a mistake with a few laps to go. We'd have seen three or four drivers with a chance of winning and plenty of overtaking - or great defence (Hulkenburg)
Based on that, not a lot needs changing. It is just that the rest of the field needs to do as good a job as Red Bull and the second Red Bull needs a very slightly faster and much luckier driver in it.
Ignore Vettel, and the Korean GP was a very good race.
Without Seb, we'd have seen a capivating defence of a possible first GP win from Grosjean - holding off Hanilton and Kimi until he made a mistake with a few laps to go. We'd have seen three or four drivers with a chance of winning and plenty of overtaking - or great defence (Hulkenburg)
Based on that, not a lot needs changing. It is just that the rest of the field needs to do as good a job as Red Bull and the second Red Bull needs a very slightly faster and much luckier driver in it.
No need to reverse grids, or introduce BTCC style success ballast. All they have to do to get more action on track is hold a race in Afghanistan, that would inject some excitement. Get the Taliban to take pot shots at anyone not going quick enough, Chilton I'm looking at you.
A bit like this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detail...
Seriously though, they could start to make things interesting by banning all car to pits in-race telemetry. So they cannot tell the driver their brakes are 2.876 degrees above optimum. Let the driver manage problems in realtime without the pits telling them. That would start to throw a few spanners in the works.
A bit like this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detail...
Seriously though, they could start to make things interesting by banning all car to pits in-race telemetry. So they cannot tell the driver their brakes are 2.876 degrees above optimum. Let the driver manage problems in realtime without the pits telling them. That would start to throw a few spanners in the works.
Hopefully next year it will not be needed with the new regs. The king of the blown diffuser may find it harder with out it.
Looking back over the year nearly all of Sebs victories have come with Adrians superb system.
Also both Red Bull and Lotus have made a giant step forward when for the reason of reliability ?? Reanault where allowed to alter their engine a couple of seasons ago.
Funny enough this also improoved the torque but more importantly vastly improoved the cooling and mpg.
Thus allowing Adrian to run a exstremly tight body work at the rear, May be to tight in Marks case last weekend!!
Looking back over the year nearly all of Sebs victories have come with Adrians superb system.
Also both Red Bull and Lotus have made a giant step forward when for the reason of reliability ?? Reanault where allowed to alter their engine a couple of seasons ago.
Funny enough this also improoved the torque but more importantly vastly improoved the cooling and mpg.
Thus allowing Adrian to run a exstremly tight body work at the rear, May be to tight in Marks case last weekend!!
Reverse grids would be difficult to work. As mentioned already, you'd end up with a lesson in how drive slowly.
An alternative solution (assuming this to be the only problem for which a solution is needed) would be to run qualifying on a Friday which determine the grid for a 30 lap sprint race on the Saturday (with one set of tyres only) which then determines the grid for the GP on the Sunday.
An alternative solution (assuming this to be the only problem for which a solution is needed) would be to run qualifying on a Friday which determine the grid for a 30 lap sprint race on the Saturday (with one set of tyres only) which then determines the grid for the GP on the Sunday.
Indy style qually with a 4 lap average speed taken as the marker. free session, unlimited laps, tyre and fuel from their weekend's allocation.
points to be the current 25 for a win etc with a bonus point for the fastest single lap.
reverse the grid of those times for sunday's race but have the points at 4x the current amount, so 100 for a win etc.
The cars would have to try on the Saturday as the points would be worth it, but they will still have to be good on the Sunday. Any cars judged to be sandbagging on the Saturday to be give a weight penalty.
A standard FIA rear wing to be used by all teams. this will have a single element with large plates, mounted on a central pylon. no monkey seats allowed.
oh, and bring back Goodyear.
Have that Bernie.
points to be the current 25 for a win etc with a bonus point for the fastest single lap.
reverse the grid of those times for sunday's race but have the points at 4x the current amount, so 100 for a win etc.
The cars would have to try on the Saturday as the points would be worth it, but they will still have to be good on the Sunday. Any cars judged to be sandbagging on the Saturday to be give a weight penalty.
A standard FIA rear wing to be used by all teams. this will have a single element with large plates, mounted on a central pylon. no monkey seats allowed.
oh, and bring back Goodyear.
Have that Bernie.
mollytherocker said:
Open the regs to allow more diversity?
Lord knows what Newey and his team would come up with!
Either it would be so fast, the human eye would not be able to see it or it would employ time travel to win the race prior to first practice!
I'll grab my paperbag being a vettel/RBR fan, but i'd agree that opening the regs isn't the answer. People are annoyed with one team finding an advantage just now with the rules as restricted as they are.Lord knows what Newey and his team would come up with!
Either it would be so fast, the human eye would not be able to see it or it would employ time travel to win the race prior to first practice!
I've thought about whether something along the lines of a modern version of a classic f1 car would work. A tough carbon cigar shape monocoque, big engine bolted to the back of it, no aero, whatever tyres they want really. Reckon that would liven it up a bit!
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff