What exactly is a reverse grid,as talked about to spice things up in F1?
- Thread starter jacksmith
- 44 comments
- 36,687 views
- 24,608
- Anoka, MN
- 36,523
- Scotland
- GTP_daan
the Interceptor
Premium
- 4,083
- Germany
- theInterceptor77
Well, the idea is that the fastest qualifier is the fastest car of the grid, which is why he starts last. The slowest qualifier (theoretically) is the slowest car on the grid, which is why he is "supported" by starting first. The fastest should be able to overtake the field to get to the front, while the slowest will have the opportunity to fight for his position. It's like putting the smallest guys in the front in a group of people, because those who are tall have a good view anyway. Putting the tall ones to the front because they are tall and the small ones in the back because they are small makes no sense.
So, putting the fastest driver in the front and the slowest driver in the back, as we know it, doesn't make much sense in theory, because the fastest one will just drive away and the slowest one will creep along in the back. The grid will just expand over the duration of the race, but drivers will already be sorted by speed.
So, putting the fastest driver in the front and the slowest driver in the back, as we know it, doesn't make much sense in theory, because the fastest one will just drive away and the slowest one will creep along in the back. The grid will just expand over the duration of the race, but drivers will already be sorted by speed.
- 84,406
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Yeah, look how well they did in Malaysia starting the race ahead of the Ferraris and McLarens...
The idea's not to have qualifying reversed, but the results of the previous race
In Malaysia, Vettel won from Webber, De La Rosa was last and Glock second last. With this idea, the grid for China would then have De La Rosa on pole and Glock alongside him, and Red Bull on the last row.
- 1,942
- Emerging from semi-retirement
- GTP_DGiant2000
- I think not
The problem with reversing the previous races results is that anyone who realises they aren't in with a sniff of any points (e.g. 80% into the race, miles off 10th) will all be pulling off or going really slow in order to come as far down the order as possible and thus gain a better grid slot next race.
- 84,406
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Imagine the fun to be had with drivers trying their hardest not to pass each other... We've had it at UKGTPs before
And then also the trade-off between a point in this race, or a top ten grid slot and a chance at more in the next race - or second, points and back row vs. third, fewer points and a row ahead on the clean side...
- 1,942
- Emerging from semi-retirement
- GTP_DGiant2000
- I think not
Imagine the fun to be had with drivers trying their hardest not to pass each other... We've had it at UKGTPs before
And then also the trade-off between a point in this race, or a top ten grid slot and a chance at more in the next race - or second, points and back row vs. third, fewer points and a row ahead on the clean side...
Not to mention saving engines, gearboxes and the like given the restriction on those.
I'd love to see when it got to a point where people were looking to the next race, whereby there'd be a race to pull off the track at the farthest point behind the leader to try and gain last place, or even slam it in reverse for a few laps and try to get lapped
- 23,439
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
Two one hour races on a Sunday with the first races results reversed for the second races grid is the only way you could realistically implement it. A reverse grid system using the current traditional single race per-weekend method would make Saturdays a bit dull wouldn't it?
- 84,406
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Indeed they do, but this is what people fail to understand - F1 is not Touring Cars, if you prefer and enjoy the action in Touring Cars, watch them, but don't go about crying for changes to F1 to make it the same.
F1 has never had thousands of overtakes, it has rarely had "wheel to wheel stuff" - the principal reasons why moments like Villenueve vs. Arnoux or Mansell vs. Senna are revered is because they were rare moments.
There has been a decline in the number of overtakes over the past few years however, and something has to be done to make it a bit easier. But making such radical and artificial changes to the racing is not the way to go. Ultimately you have to accept the vast amount of racing will seem boring compared to other race series because it provides a different form of interest - F1 isn't about overtakes basically.
The other point to make is: what do you want, entertainment or sport? Eventually sport can and does get boring, and there is a line you cross, making such artifical rules, where its no longer sport.
This is not to say that Touring Cars are rubbish though, I love my BTCC, WTCC, etc too. Its just I treat it differently to watching F1, they are seperate sports and they should stay that way.
- 772
- GTP_F1KimiFreak
- M$
The day F1 starts using reserves grids is the day i stop watching.
In GP2 you also see people trying to get 8th instead of 7th because they then start on pole position on the rubbered side of the track...
About weight penalties:
And what would be the point of trying to make a fast car when the WTCC standard is used, trying to level cars with weight differences. It scared all the manufactures almost away, the best lobbying manufacturer will win the title ...
No, the thing F1 needs is to somehow get a grip on the aerodynamics, so cars can follow closer. Or tires that dont last an whole race, which will make the choice between going fast or conserving the tires harder. (not a good ad for bridgestone though)
Also read in an magazine that some ex-f1 drivers said the brakes are becoming to good so its more difficult to overtake.
In GP2 you also see people trying to get 8th instead of 7th because they then start on pole position on the rubbered side of the track...
About weight penalties:
And what would be the point of trying to make a fast car when the WTCC standard is used, trying to level cars with weight differences. It scared all the manufactures almost away, the best lobbying manufacturer will win the title ...
No, the thing F1 needs is to somehow get a grip on the aerodynamics, so cars can follow closer. Or tires that dont last an whole race, which will make the choice between going fast or conserving the tires harder. (not a good ad for bridgestone though)
Also read in an magazine that some ex-f1 drivers said the brakes are becoming to good so its more difficult to overtake.
- 10,828
- Belgium
- bramturismo
- 1,230
Not that I have any opinion on reverse grids, but I think the last 3 races are a very good example that the fastest don't always win...
And on another note, I think it'd be pretty hard for Alonso to overtake Lotus through the race, much more on lap 1, if he had to go through the Red Bulls first.
- 1,326
- Orange County C
- GTP_Im_Sorry
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
I don't think Formula 1 needs reverse grids to make the races more exciting (doing so would get rid of the great knock-out qualifying format, anyway). It's the cars that need fixing - get rid of the emphasis on aerodynamics first.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 13,897
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
- 10,620
- gtp_jimprower
Reverse grid would encourage sandbagging, and it's harder to tell if they're doing that on a circuit than in a situation like a bracket race.
One COULD try to reverse the grid mid-race....but that really only works in non-points stock car races...
One COULD try to reverse the grid mid-race....but that really only works in non-points stock car races...
- 10,828
- Belgium
- bramturismo
You do realize the Lotus' are about 4-5 seconds a lap slower, right? Even if he'd be stuck behind Webber or Vettel, they would just make a train of three and breeze past that Lotus
- 23,439
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
Similar threads
