I don't think it's a bad idea, even if it upset the purists. I would go for that. For me, the race is the most important anyway, not the practice. A lottery is miles better than reverse grid, which would bring sandbagging, cheating and all sort if disreputable tactics. Although the tradition of forming the grid according to practice times is as old as F1 itself, there not really any justification in it. It just perpetuates the advantage of the fastest drivers/cars, and handicaps the slowest. I am sure that the best combinations of cars and drivers will always come on top anyway in the end, and seeing them battling through the field would add to the spectacle. As it is, the worst scenario from a spectator's point of view is to see the fastest car getting pole, and then running away from the field unchallenged and winning without ever having to overtake or being caught up. That is complete boredom: the last Chinese GP.
Nah. But, we know Bernie's crazy & just after publicity. Keeps him on the "back page" (if not the front.) Seems to me JT/the FIA are just kinda "hanging out" these days; No real "direction" whatsoever. Again, I believe there's just too many folks in the TWG/SWG with fingers in the pie. Cheers, Ian
Please explain how the scheme in post #2 would allow for sandbagging or disreputable tactics. Random lottery seems ridiculous.
If teams find their cars are already out of the points, their interest to be to slow them down to be last at the finish. Multiply that by several teams outside the points at each GP (half the field, right?), and you will have a procession of back-markers fighting to finish last, dragging their cars in the last few laps, and possibly interfereing with the leaders overtaking them!! Half way through each race, you will find that the no-hoper teams would slow their cars to a ridiculous pace, create unecessary pit stops, fake technical gremlins, just to have their cars finish last, just to start on the front row at the next GP. That's what reverse grid is about: tactics. Random lottery seems a good alternative to the present system to me, if they wish to change anything.
You don't seem to understand that having already decided that F1 isn't a sport, but a business, FIA/FOM, Todt and Ecclestone have now a choice: favour technoloogy, or improve the show. Although they have to bring some technology to attract the big manufacturers, they know that improving the show is what will really put bums on seats, and bring TV channels to buy it. The general public don't care about technology, only the connaisseurs do. So Bernie and his ilk try to bring more entertainment. Changing qualifs rules was an attempt to do that. It backfired, but I don't expect Bernie to accept that defeat laying down ...
No tnx for me. I imagine the current system was originally put in place to avoid backmarkers being able to compromise the races of the fastest car/drivers. Especially now with all the connections between different teams, what if for example Toro Rossos constantly let Red Bulls pass without a fight and keep crashing Ferraris and Mercedes out of the race?
Hummm You could already imagine a similar agreement between Mercedes or Ferrari and their engine customers.
Agreed Or Reverse single lap qualifying based on previous race results. Make merc go out early on a cold track
That may satisfy people who wish to penalise Mercedes for their success, but the same rules would apply when Ferrari, or Red Bull get on top too. Would many tifosi like to see the Scuderia handicaped then?
Ferrari would be able to at least go out after mercedes since they finish every race behind. It used to be the winner from the previous race for to go last which just gave the leaders another advantage
But why should the leader be handicapped ? Success should be rewarded, not punished to the benefit of low achievers. F1 is supposed to be a competition to determine the best driver, not a step up for less skilled ones. IMO
inverting the grid would be tantamount to creating a blockade at the first few turns caused by the slower cars... we already see what happens when a car doesn't get off quick enough and gets passed by someone that has a good start... more mayhem at turn 1... crashing out more cars from the field... qualifying sets the field by capability of the driver and car, allowing for separation from the less capable cars the prize for a good qualifying effort is having a clearer track ahead
It is about the s in show: F1 should also be interesting and entertaining. Watching the dominant team driving into the sunset without a fight is only interesting to a few fans
That's those days F1 my friend. Today, it's 95% show. the balance is sport. Nothing is fair. No testing, crap tyres, punishment for blown engine and gearboxes, heck..they can't even race in the wet these days.
This is where opinion diverge; some people see F1 as a sport, others see it as an entertainment, others still as a display of advanced technology. For some it's simply a business. There are even people on this forum, who think that F1 belongs to Ferrari and they should win all the time!! I think we are at risk of losing the core values if F1 starts to make a show of it, and not a fair competition. It's motor racing and it shouldn't be manipulated to become artificial. To me, handicaping a winner is a definite No No. Like Fast Ian keeps saying, "it's up to the other teams to catch up!" That logic applies to most sports, I believe. I don't mind at all "watching the dominant team driving into the sunset", because there is a lot more to see than just the leaders in a race. The battles behind, the progress of the "lesser team", the efforts of the new drivers are also interesting to watch for me.
+1 to all! It's not the friggin' WWF for gawds sake!..... It's a very high risk, high reward sport. The idea of handicapping the best goes against pretty much everything sport is (or at least should be) about. You do a better job than the other guys, so you get penalized? No thanks! You win, eg, the London marathon so you have to carry ballast or start from the back next time out? No thanks. Complete & utter anathema to what sport is all about IMO. I've also noticed the TV guys seem to be listening these days - Merc disappear into the sunset & get very, very little airtime until the last lap & the flag..... They're getting pretty good at showing us whatever 'battles' are going on, pretty much regardless of the positions involved. A good dice between 3 or 4 cars for 10th can be good viewing IMO - Particularly if someone(s) fighting above their weight, or blitzing his 'mate etc. To me anyway there's always interesting stuff going down, even if not at the pointy end. (And the F1 app helps here - even if the TV isn't showing it, it lets you see what's happening back thru the field. Good stuff!) Cheers, Ian
You need a balance between the 4 S. If sport dominates show you will run out of viewers. Which is what is happening now: less viewers on TV and on site In Europe some call it now Formula Yawn.
