New 2006 qualifying formats

[kikie]

New 2006 qualifying formats VOTE!!!

There're 2 new proposals; which one did you vote and what do you think about these new rules???

 

[MagpieRacer]

i voted for Proposal 2, sounds quite entertaining but could be very long winded.

 

[Slick Rick]

Same here but i did it because then the Slow runners cant get in the top 10's way

 

[Omnis]

will there be 20 or 22 cars next season?

system #2 just won't work with 22 cars. plus, it's really unfair. the lower tier cars will get even LESS input that they can usually record during qualifying and practice. I'm more in favor of the current system or system #1.

I like the competative nature of the current system, but system 1 would rub that out a bit. It would better measure overall driver skill and car management for the race. However, the extended qualifying that system 1 brings, I think, subtracts from the race excitement and instead puts it into qualifying. That could mean that a consistent pole sitter would have a lot less pressure from lower slot positions...and I don't think that's a good thing considering what racing is all about. Ground gained or lost would have to be decided in the pits, and we know how boring that is. I think if tire changes were allowed again, it would let chasing drivers catch up a lot quicker considering their heightened level of effort that comes with the tire change's security. I really don't know how everything will unfold, though, and I can see why the FIA has such a tough time.

I think i'm going to vote to keep the current layout. Maybe later i'll vote for system #1 as well.

 

[kikie]

Is it possible to vote more than once??

 

[Omnis]

probably, if you delete your cookies or vote on a different IP.

i'll go click from my uncle's place next time i'm over there.

 

[Blake]

I voted for proposal number 2.

Blake

 

[m7ammed]

proposal number it just gives everybody the same chance , and adds some excitement to qualifying

 

[Marek99]

proposal 2 is my choice

 

[ExigeEvan]

Proposal 1 for me.

 

[westwood]

id really rather they left qualifying alone, but if they must take the CART approach i prefer #2, as it would be teams sitting for 55 minutes then going out and running 2 hard laps at the very end of the session.

 

[kensei]

I went for #2. Even though it is overly complicated. I like the idea that the slower cars are removed from the equation as the time runs down. It keeps it interesting and keeps those slower cars out of the way.

I don't know why they can't jsut go back to a 60 minutes shootout, fastest lap gets pole no fuel OR tire restrictions but you do need to run the chassis you will race in (no qualifying cars), though engine...hmmm, if a team could drop a qualifying engine in in 60mins, well 30mins (after some reckon laps) then by all means, though doubtful. I do like the idea of a qualifying tire, low fuel to see what these cars and drivers can really do.

I watch the MotoGP qualifyer at Laguna Seca and it was fascinating. It is much like the above and was fascinating.

 

[Lee]

I went for proposal 1

 

[DeuceOfClub]

Current format

 

[Seventeen]

Prop 2 Is a page right out of the IRL's road course qualifying.Sort of anyway,the IRL has the Firestone Fast Six,where the top 6 qualifiers have a ten minute shootout race of sorts for the Pole.

 

[SouL]

They're both interesting proposals.

The main problem with the current format is that it rewards drivers who get into a winning streak. Win a GP and you score the highest chance to score pole. Score pole and you increase your chances of winning a race. And so forth. It doesn't really show who has RAW pace during the qualifying session.
The upside of the current format is that it ensures that every car gets the same amount of TV coverage. Sponsors pay to have their logos be seen on cars. They like this aspect of the current qualy format.


If they're going to encourage teams to 'run as many laps' as they want during a given session, then they need to allow the construction of a qualifying car/engine package. A car drivers can abuse on Saturdays to achieve pole. With the current rules, we're going to see cars run as few laps as possible to preserve their package for the race.
Well... not having cars run during qualifying creates for boring TV. Stations aren't going to buy the rights to broadcast F1 qualifying if there's nothing happening for 55 minutes of a 60 minute session. Team sponsors sure as hell won't like it either.

The reason the 60 minute shoot out was abandoned for the current format was because the fast cars hogged all the TV time.

 

[Blake]

And with proposal #2 slow cars will only get 15 minutes to exploit as much TV time as possible. So sponsors will really want their sponsored cars staying out for as long as possible into the session, because again, the fast cars hog all the TV time.

Blake

 

[Mooman117]

Prop 2 for me.

Its ashame there wasn't an option to return to the old Quali format 1hr all cars fastest lap, I would rather have that.

 

[Lee]

Its ashame there wasn't an option to return to the old Quali format 1hr all cars fastest lap, I would rather have that.

I totally agree, yes the sponsor for the lower teams will not be happy at all (with TV coverage and all) but i always thought F1 was about the entertainment and the actual racing, not money.

 

[kikie]

Its ashame there wasn't an option to return to the old Quali format 1hr all cars fastest lap, I would rather have that

That's exactly what I was thinking. ==> 1h qualifying
.

i always thought F1 was about the entertainment and the actual racing, not money.

F1 was all about racing but became and therefore is all about money. What Ferrari did last years and what M. Schumacher personallly did (on track) to win isn't even sporty and entertainment anymore.

 

[Blake]

i always thought F1 was about the entertainment and the actual racing, not money.

F1 about actual racing and entertainment? Did you even hear a whisper of what happenned at Indy?

And any motorsport that is not commercially viable will not survive. The sponsors of teams like Minardi love this current format because each and every car gets (in theory) the same coverage.

In the new suggested formats (especially #2) the slower cars will not get much television coverage unless they are the only cars on track, and even then an adbreak would probably be the order of the day. Not good news for sponsors. With proposal 2 the situations is exagerated because the slowest 5 cars (9 times out of 10 - 2 Minardi's 2 Jordans and something else) will be forced into the garage after 15 minutes. In which time they'd be lucky to get half a minutes coverage of each car.

Blake

 

[FWA2500]

I went for #2. Even though it is overly complicated. I like the idea that the slower cars are removed from the equation as the time runs down. It keeps it interesting and keeps those slower cars out of the way.

would you rather have a 10 car grid by completely eliminating the slower cars?
would you have rather just seen ferrari parade around indy with the slower cars gone and the michelins withdrawn?

i went with #1

 

[Blake]

He means stopping them from getting in the way of the fast guys during hot laps.

Blake

 

[Lee]

Just heard on ITV that proposal 2 won with 53% of the votes

 

[Blake]

Heh, that's cool, very close though.

Blake

 

[Lee]

Heh, that's cool, very close though.

Blake

Its funny that before Martin Brundle said he would go for proposal 2, proposal 1 was in the lead by 4% or somin like that.... meh oh well must just be co-incedence

 

[Slick Rick]

I like this year when they sometimes send a retired car back out toget a better qualifing position next race.
With the new qualifing formats do you think that will change??

 

[Blake]

Of course it will.

Blake