FOTA look into new qually format

[duke_toaster]

That's why such a system, if it's based on lap times, would probably not work IMO.

[Pingguest]

Why introducing another artifical and unnecessarily complex system? Why not simply have a 1-hour season without any restrictions on fuel, tyres, engines and laps and without a post-qualifying parc fermé? I don't understand. You get the idea the manufactures and FIA don't like high tv-ratings.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Why introducing another artifical and unnecessarily complex system? Why not simply have a 1-hour season without any restrictions on fuel, tyres, engines and laps and without a post-qualifying parc fermé? I don't understand. You get the idea the manufactures and FIA don't like high tv-ratings.

You don't get high TV ratings if all that happens in the first three quarters of an hour is Ross Brawn eating a banana while watching the FI's cleaning the track!

How many tyres/engines is it necessary to use to get a car through one hours qualifying?

Parc ferme is there to ensure that the car that qualified is still the same car that actually enters the race.

At the end of the day it's all down to how one hours qualifying can be entertaining and yet be cost effective.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

You don't get high TV ratings if all that happens in the first three quarters of an hour is Ross Brawn eating a banana while watching the FI's cleaning the track!.

Before 2003 indeed some qualifying sessions were boring in the first 30 or even 45 minutes. But was that due to the system or because drivers had to save their tyres and laps? Remember, the number of laps and tyres were limited. Even before the 2003 rule changes Mike Gascoigne proposed to change the tyre regulations and abolish the limit of 12 laps.

But if a 1-hour sessions seems to be too boring they could make it a 45-minute session.

How many tyres/engines is it necessary to use to get a car through one hours qualifying?

Assume they could do 3 to 5 runs (out-lap, timed lap and in-lap) per hour and they want to a new set of tyres for every run, they could use three to five set of tyres per qualifying.

Parc ferme is there to ensure that the car that qualified is still the same car that actually enters the race.

I know. The question is not what purpose this rule has, but whether this attempt for cost efficiency justifies it to more predictable races.

At the end of the day it's all down to how one hours qualifying can be entertaining and yet be cost effective.

A lottery can be entertaining too and is very cost efficient.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

But if a 1-hour sessions seems to be too boring they could make it a 45-minute session.

And then we'd have only half an hour of boredom.

I like the suggestion from FOTA.But Q3 with everyone on the same fuel level would also suit me.What would the fuel level be though and it's also going to be particularly busy in the pit lane during that first stop! Maybe there should be a minimum level of fuel or fuel the car as you want just prior to the race start.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

And then we'd have only half an hour of boredom.

I disagree, but at least we might get a proper qualifying again. At least how it was supposed to mean: just to get the fastest man over one lap on pole position for Sunday's race.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

At least how it was supposed to mean: just to get the fastest man over one lap on pole position for Sunday's race.

Which is where the current qualifying (where the fastest time usually occurs in Q2) falls down a bit.

[Adam43]

That seems like fun and is perfectly suited for a non championship end of season bit of fun.

[Spritle]

Go back to the pre 2003 rules before the Shumi Stopper System went into effect and just leave things ALONE for awhile; boredom or not!

Right now I hardly ever pay much attention to Q1 & Q2 anyway since it really doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

The last 5 minutes of Q3 is the whole show for me and many others.

A mini race will add nothing except more opportunity for some backmarker to bin up the quali and possibly the race of someone who should be at the front due to their speed which is the reason I thought we have quali in the first place.

I really think some fans won't be happy until they pick the grid out of a hat to ensure variety on the podium. I'd rather have the fastest car win races and save the egalitarian and gimmicky racing for NASCAR.

[Dutton]

There isn't much egalitarian (or gimmicky, really, about NASCAR). They have that All-Stars thingy which is a total gimmick fest, but it does not pretend to be otherwise. The regular season NASCAR stuff is not particularly gimmicky at all (they do throw some yellows that seem a bit mysterious, I grant that, and that is tremendously annoying, but overall it is just like other series). The recent advent of The Chase is nasty, but I would not say it is exactly "gimmicky": it is an alternate points system based on penalising success, and it sucks (and it seems practically everyone agrees), but all points systems are artificial really.

They line-up on the grid according to how quickly they qualifying in a qualifying session (the top-35 thing in Sprint is a bit bad in my view, but it is ultimately based on rewarding success). In the race the drivers make ground, or lose it, or stay where they started, according to the usual combination of speed, pitwork, and racing.

To succeed in NASCAR you have to be very good at what you do, and you have to have the resources and depth of man-power necessary for such things (just like all the other series out there).

I just get a bit irritated by how NASCAR is the automatic kicking dog for "gimmicks", and all that, when they do not do things like reverse grids and success ballast (unlike other series I can think of).

[ThaRobster]

I don't think that the changes which have been made to quali over the years and which are being proposed now are just for the sake of the spectacle (although there is certainly a large element of that). It is also to shake up the grid a bit surely? To give the lower budget teams a chance to do well. It places great risk on the main title contenders, they have to balance the need for a fast lap and the risk of falling off and being at the back.

Maybe its just me, but I do like systems like this.

[EERO]

Nearly forty years of being an F1 fan and this is the stupidist idea I have heard yet. It is overly complex, potentialy dangerous and absurdly gimmicky. It's one more nail in the coffin of the Sport driven in by the need to create a spectacle for TV audiences. Feh..

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by EERO

Nearly forty years of being an F1 fan and this is the stupidist idea I have heard yet.

We shall see on December 4th whether or not the paddock agree with you.

But they did come up with the idea in the first place,so it's no good blaming Max if it gets written into the rules.

However.....Max has said that he will not entertain FOTA making changes to the 'show',which is why he didn't go along with the requested refueling ban!

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Spritle

Go back to the pre 2003 rules before the Shumi Stopper System went into effect and just leave things ALONE for awhile; boredom or not!

Right now I hardly ever pay much attention to Q1 & Q2 anyway since it really doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

The last 5 minutes of Q3 is the whole show for me and many others.

A mini race will add nothing except more opportunity for some backmarker to bin up the quali and possibly the race of someone who should be at the front due to their speed which is the reason I thought we have quali in the first place.

I really think some fans won't be happy until they pick the grid out of a hat to ensure variety on the podium. I'd rather have the fastest car win races and save the egalitarian and gimmicky racing for NASCAR.

Thank you...One hour and the fastest man is on pole..

[Dutton]

The pre-2003 system would suit me down to the ground. Force them to complete one flying lap in the first 15 minutes if "the wait" is such a massive problem, but I personally had zero problem with that aspect.

The reason the current set-up is the best we have had since 2002 is that you have the effect of multiple cars on-track setting times, and the end part of each section comes to the climax effect like with the old system. Basically, the best aspects of the current system are the parts that most resemble the pre-2003 system.

However, reverting to that is never going to happen since the FIA would have to admit it made a mistake.

[browney]

I like the current system with the exception of keeping your fuel load. If that is the issue (lightest car on pole) why not just get rid of that rule and let them refill after qually?

[Dutton]

A very good question. It is one I've often contemplated.

I've always figured the ideal compromise (for some will like fuel-qualy) would be for the teams to declare fuel loads before Q3, but then do the session on fumes. The teams have to try and guess where they will be on the grid, and put their fuel accordingly.

They may get it right, or they may not. You still get the supposed exciting mystery, or whatever the living crap this race-fuel thing does, but you also get to see the grid arranged according to outright pace.

[Glen]

All this discussion seems to be motivated by the desire to have the result of qualifying to reflect which is the fastest car/driver. They already have that, and prizes are awarded for it too - it's called the race.

[mattt]

Originally Posted by Dutton

I've always figured the ideal compromise (for some will like fuel-qualy) would be for the teams to declare fuel loads before Q3, but then do the session on fumes. The teams have to try and guess where they will be on the grid, and put their fuel accordingly.

Was it not similar to that in 2007, but they had the fuel in the car at the start and refilled.

I think your idea is a good compromise

Originally Posted by Glen

All this discussion seems to be motivated by the desire to have the result of qualifying to reflect which is the fastest car/driver. They already have that, and prizes are awarded for it too - it's called the race.

Quite often the fastest car doesn't win like Spa last year. Due to pit issues, incidents and penalties

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by browney

I like the current system with the exception of keeping your fuel load. If that is the issue (lightest car on pole) why not just get rid of that rule and let them refill after qually?

The problem is though that the post-qualifying parc fermé involves more than the ban of refuelling after qualifying.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

The problem is though that the post-qualifying parc fermé involves more than the ban of refuelling after qualifying.

It used to be that you could take out your **** or bust Q engine and replace it with a 'milder' one before the race.Ok for some,expensive for others.

[Teretonga]

You could make them do Q3 on a full load (!) and then whatever they have left is what they start on....If they want to be light they have to do more laps in Q3 and if they want to run long they only do a few....


Well.....FOTA were talking about spicing up the 'show'......

[Bleu]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

You could make them do Q3 on a full load (!) and then whatever they have left is what they start on....If they want to be light they have to do more laps in Q3 and if they want to run long they only do a few....


Well.....FOTA were talking about spicing up the 'show'......

Full load doesn't work either. If team A has fuel capacity of 100 litres and team B capacity of 120 litres. A would have certainly advantage in terms of grid position then.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It used to be that you could take out your **** or bust Q engine and replace it with a 'milder' one before the race.Ok for some,expensive for others.

With proper rules some top teams could decide not to use components specificly made for qualifying. Remember Niki Lauda and Alain Prost winning world championship in their TAG Porsche powered McLarens. TAG Porsche didn't had a qualifying engine, so Prost and Lauda always had to start from the back and overtake the others in the race.

[Teretonga]

It doesn't have to be a full load in reality, obviously a nominated amount would make more sense and provide greater equality.
It was only a teaser anyway....