Change qualifying

[E34-3.2]

HealeyV8 said:

Always have qualifying with a wet track. Fit watering devices. That should spice things up!

Well, that would be Hamilton on pole 99% of the times.

[Stan the Bat]

E34-3.2 said:

HealeyV8 said:

Always have qualifying with a wet track. Fit watering devices. That should spice things up!

Well, that would be Hamilton on pole 99% of the times.

And MadMax in P2.

[rdjohn]

andburg said:

interesting but its not comparing them to a base laptime, its showing field spread, what it shows is that the top few cars were going much slower than their potential until the pit stops.As they stopped and moved to a more durable tyre they could use more of the potential which spread the field, the rear cars may actually have been running faster then they were lap1-12 but were slower in relation to the tops cars.

Would be interesting to see a proper laptime plot for some of the cars. Magnussen we know set the fastest lap late on but that barely registers on the chart's he turned everything down afterwards

If the top-6 are rising, and the bottom-14 are falling, it certainly shows that we do not have a level playing field. You can look at this graph for every race this year and it’s always the same outcome. If Williams and McLaren do not understand how to unleashes the potential of these tyres, then it’s just another artificial barrier to success.

We want to know who is the best driver, in the cleverest team. Having to spend on having 8, or 20 guys in a team working on how to use their tyres effectively is a massive waste of resource.

[Mr Tidy]

If F1 is serious about reducing costs, why do they need Qualifying at all?

Just put them on the grid in the order that they finished the last race!

[Vaud]

Mr Tidy said:

If F1 is serious about reducing costs, why do they need Qualifying at all?

Just put them on the grid in the order that they finished the last race!

Because it isn't a significant cost. 700+ people in Brackley for Mercedes are the cost .

[Evangelion]

I've long considered quali the most stupid idea ever introduced to F1. Cars have to slog round at maximum speed (which is faster than race speed, remember) for lap after lap, with the consequent effects on engine, gearbox and component life, not to mention the increased risk of accidents with possible dire consequences for cars and drivers.

So I've come up with this: At the beginning of the season, all drivers names go into a draw. First out picks one race to start from pole, one from second, one from third all the way to the back of the grid. Next out chooses (from one less option per race), next chooses and so on, until the last poor sod out gets no choice, he has to take what the others left - but still gets one pole, one second etc.

If a driver fails to start a race, everyone behind him moves up. If a driver leaves a team, his grid positions are taken over by the incoming driver.

One drawback is that this will only work if there are as many races as drivers. And I'm sure you lot will have great fum pointing out many more.

Also, of course, the first driver out of the draw is virtually guaranteed to win Monaco.

[Vaud]

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/features/2016/3...

Prewar, it was by drawing lots...

[Mr Tidy]

Vaud said:

Mr Tidy said:

If F1 is serious about reducing costs, why do they need Qualifying at all?

Just put them on the grid in the order that they finished the last race!

Because it isn't a significant cost. 700+ people in Brackley for Mercedes are the cost .

Fair point, but if you only have 4 engines for a season blowing one up in Qualy can work out pretty expensive once the grid penalties are applied!

[jpf]

Hamilton wins on team orders, bottas second,, vettel third

The race is pre-ordained

The only variable is mechanical

[Evangelion]

I agree, total borefest. Just like the last one, in which the first SIX finished in grid order.

I didn't watch that and I won't be watching this.

[CanAm]

For the benefit of our younger readers, in the fifties the point scoring was 8,6,4,3,2,1 with 1 point for the fastest lap. Hawthorne beat Moss to the 1958 championship thanks to that one extra point.

[Vaud]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

Unless you reward the qualifying position as well.

But as noted it isn’t a broken format. Some tracks are an issue though.

[thegreenhell]

If you have reverse-grid qualifying, would an engine penalty send you to the front of the grid?

Seriously though, no amount of fiddling with the format will fix the fundamental issues with why the cars can't/don't race each other closely on a Sunday.

[MitchT]

The only thing I'd change about F1 qualifying is forcing people to start the race on the tyres they used for their fastest lap in Q2, which seems a bit forced and fake. Other than that I'd sooner just see it left alone than interfered with by silly gimmicks that contrive situations that aren't a reflection of a team/driver's true performance. We have silly gimmicks (reverse grids, success ballast, etc.) in the BTCC and to me it's false and makes the whole thing look like a bit of a joke. The concept of "competition" seem to be lost on some folk.

[jpf]

The result was as I predicted.

How about awarding points to concede 10 positions? You get pole but in exchange for starting 11th you get 5 points plus your race result. You get 10th in qualifying but starting 20th gets you 5 points.

My beef is the race result is essentially determined Saturday with the race being pre-ordained--unless it rains or mechanical issues.

[realjv]

Nothing wrong with qualifying which having cars that can follow and race one another wouldn't fix. I would like to see one point for pole though.

[Mr_Thyroid]

It's the tyre rules that need to change - I've always thought these rules restrict rather than promote the use of different strategies.

[LP670]

ive been watching F1 for over 25 years now and i think the current qualifying format is the best they have had over that time, its one of very few things that F1 doesn't need to change.

[Evangelion]

Gaz. said:

jpf said:

The result was as I predicted.



My beef is the race result is essentially determined Saturday with the race being pre-ordained--unless it rains or mechanical issues.

It's only been like that since 1950, maybe you should watch something else.

It was fine when the cars weren't covered in aerodynamic rubbish and could actually overtake each other.

[MissChief]

Mr_Thyroid said:

It's the tyre rules that need to change - I've always thought these rules restrict rather than promote the use of different strategies.

In what way? How would you change it? When there were free choice of tyres 90% of the grid were on the same tyres anyway as they always work out a fastest or best strategy, exactly as they worked out it's quicker to carry less fuel and conserve during the race than race flat out with a heavier car full of fuel.

They'll quickly work out the best strategy and only very low teams will take a chance on an alternate strategy. Even then, to use the example of the current teams, the Ferrari and Mercedes are so far ahead that even if Toro Rosso, McLaren etc go long on their first stops they're not going to materially change the outcome of the race. Sure they'll improve on their start positions but they're never going to win the race.