The term "qualifiying" is a misnomer when it comes to the session that determines the grid order. In other sports (athleticism, cycle racing, track racing, fencing, etc... qualifying means the elimination of the slowest competitors to arrive at the required number for the final. In F1, all the cars are meant to participate to the GP, therefore Q1,2 and 3 are not in fact held to allow cars to go ahead towards the race, but to determine the starting order. That also could be questioned. As it is, the grid is spread over 200, 300 yards or more maybe, with the fastest at the front. It's unique to motorsport (bike racing do the same to hand over an extra advantage to the competitors who are already the fastest. I mean, you don't give an extra yard to the fastest 100m runner. That would seem daft, but in motor racing we do, and we handicap the slowest by imposing them an extra distance to cover. The cars on the front row start at least 300 yards before the back row, I estimate, in the same race! The fact is that in F1, the qualifs session has become quite marketable for TV coverage, so the FIA, FOM and Bernie want to gloss over it and make it a show in itself. But do we need qualifs? No sure. We could just have several practise sessions, and the starting order determined at random like a lottery. That would fairer maybe, and allow a better mix during the race. No doubt the best cars and drivers will always come to the front eventually, but they certainly would have to work more for their money. If we don't keep the present system, a random system seems better to me than reserve grid. Reserve grid would lead to massive sandbagging, IMHO. In endurance, up to the mid-60s, many races were started without qualifs, or even practice times taken into account. The cars started in order of engine capacity; usually the 7L Chevy-engine cars were first! I don't think there was a big outcry then ...
So, we don't need qualifs at each GP. OK, but what do you do for the first GP of the year? What do you do when a driver is replaced through the season? How do you determine the grid order in these conditions?
Those situations could be addressed by eg results from the previous year. New driver goes to last spot for the first race. Nothing difficult really. The bigger issue is to let go of the current rules and bring on reversed grid. Not such a novelty anyway as lower racing leagues have used this.
The point is: would the fans like it? would the spectators like it? and would the TV channels buy it? I am not sure about that!
Purists would hate it. The races would be more dramatic. At least in the first half until the natural order has been reestablished. Any time we had "reversed" grid in the past because of special circumstances those races turned out to be super spectacular
If you followed my proposal (DNFs from previous race go to the back) you would have to establish that a "finishing" car had to be say within 5 laps of the winning car's distance. This would discourage a driver in a damaged car limping along to try and "finish". This would still encourage passes in the last few laps, as even if they were to crash out they would have covered enough to be within 5 laps of the winner. You might have to make adjustments in the case of one driver being crashed out by another (call it the Takuma Sato rule). In that case perhaps the no-fault driver keeps his grid spot for the next race in the position he was in at the time of the crash. Perhaps periodically there could be a qualifying session to determine the grid. Maybe every 5 races or something. It sounds complicated but is actually quite simple. It would require teams to strategize over multiple races, not just one weekend.
Wow! I can't believe some of the craziness that's being suggested here! - You arrive & setup on Thursday - You have FP1 & 2 on Friday - You have FP3 & qualy on Saturday - You race on Sunday (preferably after a "nice" warmup in the am.) The fastest guy from qualy (which I think they've got about right just now) is on pole. Everyone else is ordered behind him. No problem. Pretty much always been that way, and hopefully will remain that way forever.... "Reversed grids?" No thanks! "Based on some nonsense Saturday race?" No thanks. "Based on previous race results?" No thanks. IMESHO, it is what it is; go quicker than the next guy, you start ahead. Always been that way, and to me anyway, hopefully always will be. Cheers, Ian
Yes, I know, but the show becomes rather boring in the eyes of many, when the grid positions (at least for the 2 front rows almost decide the outcome of the race. Hence the idea of reshuffling the pack a little bit to keep the interest going. Also, I hope you won't mind me saying but "always been that way" is one of the poorest reasons you can give in any debate as my former CEO used to say. People are supposed to come up with new ideas, good ones, and not get stuck in a rut. F1, like anything else on this planet, has to change with the time.
OK, how about something completely different. A driver + car minimum weight starts at 600 kg (IIRC) and goes up by 200 grams for each point scored throughout the season...
To me it's very depressing that this sport I have l been so enthusiastic about and have followed so closely since 1967 has come to a place where contrived foolishness like this is actually given serious consideration.
Reversed grid? GREAT idea...Let´s put the slowest car in the field (the rolling chicane) in the front and the fastest car in the back....Unlike now the field will not be stretched after the start because the fastest are in front but compressed because the cars in the back are closing the gap on the start/finish straight. Now have all these 22 cars going in turn one with people like Hamilton, Rosberg, Vettel, Raikkonen, Ricciardo trying to get by as many cars as possible in the first corner.... I know that the engines are restricted to 5 but how many chassis can one built in one season because they all might need a new one after every single race...Unlikely there would be no huge starting accident regularly...What a great idea... Starting position by shuffling...so there will be moaning and whining how unfair it is because driver A was drawn to an average starting position 6 and his opponent for the WDC on average at 9... We all know that winning the WDC is very much depending on the car you are sitting in, now you want to add pure luck at the raffle drum in order to find a worthy champion??? It is funny how desperate people try to make F1 more interesting changing things that worked over decades and therefor are most likely not the reason for a boring race instead of addressing the real problems...
Nothing contrived about this. All a matter of rules. If reversed grid had the standard since 1950 people would hate the suggestion of our current system Other racing formulas use reversed grid. PS: you cant compare F1 of 67 to today and criticize it for being contrived: F1 tech has developed so fast and so far that it and its rules needed to be contrived for its own safety. Case in point was the ban of moveable aeros just a few years later. That was contrived. As was the ban of skirts and ground effect and slicks and computer controlled ride height and ABS and and and. F1 is defined by the 3 S: Safety, skill and show. Always was, always will be
when I club raced we would do one reverse grid a weekend with NASA. I loved it! I moved from 27th to 4th in this short 1 minute 20 second lap. http://www.ferrarichat.com/videos/20051106_355C_27th-4th.mpg
How about when there were more cars trying to qualify than spots on the grid? Probably not practical with the costs now! Also not likely to start only say 18 cars with the 22 trying to qualify we have now.
This is simple, run the single lap qual format from a decade ago - modify to have two timed laps so everybody can go for broke on at least one of them and qualify order in order of the championship standings (leader goes first) so as the track improves over the session, the slower cars get to take advantage mixing the grid up a bit.
+1 "Contrived foolishness" pretty much sums it up! There's many reasons the sport has evolved the way it has. We may not always agree with the direction, but 'reversed grids' & starts based on previous results.... Really? Utter nonsense IMO. Do we want to follow the best drivers, in the fastest cars, or a contrived circus act? I know my answer....... Cheers, Ian
+1 It's not rocket science...they need to make cars be able to follow each other, which in simple terms is reducing aero. However, teams have their own agenda and most it seems want MORE aero. Get rid of the democracy in F1, and good things will come.
Come now Andreas. Do you really, honestly think that Enzo Ferrari or Colin Chapman walked through their race shops and said to their mechanics, "Now remember the three S's gentlemen, Safety skill and show!" I think it was more a case of the three F's...build the Fastest car, find the most Fearless driver to pilot it, and be the First to the checkered flag. If you weren't on board with that you were gone. I miss that, and that was the point of my post.
They did not. But Bernie and the FISA/FIA did. Not in these exact words but through their actions. F1 has long stopped being the formula for the fastest possible car but being a compromise of show and driver talent. The skill argument killed innovations like ABS. Safety killed ground effect cars and show brought us DRS. And show could give us reverse grid. Fact is that viewership is going down and without a good show and marketing $ there will be no racing. No bucks, no Buck Rogers. Reverse grid would be one way to make for more interesting races. PS: it is actually 4 S: speed, skill, safety and $how
Even this old dinosaur must admit your statement above is probably correct. However, any formula, by definition, is contrived. We can't undo the technology that has been partially responsible for the rule changes. The handicapping part is what stinks. Go fast, get penalized HTF does that make sense? And I do compare F1 of the past to today and find today's format and cars both ridiculous and getting more so. I remember rising early to watch(and turn up the sound!) all the qualifying and races every other weekend. Now, if I'm up at that hour it's a toss up between F1 and some old western being re-run for the umpteenth time. They lost me years ago. As for the 3 S, perhaps but not necessarily in that order. "F1 has long stopped being the formula for the fastest possible car but being a compromise of show and driver talent." Yes!^^ exactly my lament.
Good point about the handicapping part that stinks. I get that. The reality is that in a wider sense F1 has been handicapping the successfull teams for years. Just look at where Ferrari would be today if testing was allowed. Or engine upgrades. Or no forced vacation break etc For years they have been trying to level the playing field. For better or worse. At least this rule change would make the races more interesting
Dangerous, I say. Look at the in car lap posted by Rob. Says he has a blast, probably less so if one of those back markers had taken him out. It's a moot point the faster cars will prevail if they don't crash.
+1 I guess only Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull would benefit from complete freedom in testing and development. It would probably bankrupt the other teams.
Keep it simple Free practice on Saturday to set the cars up etc,timed but not determining grid position, followed by Bernie (or Miss World etc) on the rostrum He (she) puts 22 lottery balls into the machine..the numbers indicating the grid position 1-22. Then the balls come out and are allocated according to the surname of the driver e.g Alonso gets the first one to come out,so if its number 5 he starts 5th on the grid.(Bernie/MW hands him the ball) Next up is Bottas, say he gets number 2 then he will line up 2nd on the grid . etc etc Then on Sunday look forward to a very different grid line up for each race. you are almost guaranteed quite a number of laps at the start as the faster cars move through the field.Bit like China on steroids. This would help even up the huge advantage the big budget teams have over everyone else... problem is of course getting Mercedes/Ferrari/Red Bull to agree to it.
