Why must qualifying change every 6 months!?

[Blake]

Link.

Yes, it’s only a small change, but it still annoys me. Can’t we have a qualifying format that stays the same for more than 6 months?

 

[Carl.]

Well, at least cutting the most boring part of qualifying is a good idea.

 

[Casio]

So cutting it down from 20-15 minutes. To get rid of the 5 minute burn-off...Now won't they still just burn-off for 5 minutes and only go flat-out for 10?

I fail to see the point.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

The problem with qualifying is that "the people" don't want what they think they want. See, people say "oh, the fastest car should do best in qualifying, and be on pole", but they also want to see a race on the Sunday, where someone storms from the back of the grid to take the win.

Thusly, you have a problem with qualifying, in that you have to configure it so that there's some semblance of a race on the Sunday, without making it entirely arbitrary, or cheatable.

Max Mosley (widely regarded as an idiot) has been saying this for years. You can't spend two days lining the cars up so that the fastest is at the front, and then justifiably complain when there's no overtaking.

 

[TheCracker]

I think they should just pick grid positions out of a hat on the Saturday and be done with it. Perhaps the 'show' could be like the National Lottery or when they choose 'groups' for the World or European footie cups?

The present system works upto the last 20 minutes with the stupid 'fuel burn' session - it reminds me of some sort of Toyota Prius GT4 Prologue licence test!

I don't see whats wrong with the old 'here's-an-hour-do-your-best' system that motorsport has often traditionally used. Perhaps the FIA could threaten to hose-pipe the track at some random time during the hour just to ensure we don't get everyone waiting for the last 10 minutes of the session.

 

[TMM]

The problem with qualifying is that "the people" don't want what they think they want. See, people say "oh, the fastest car should do best in qualifying, and be on pole", but they also want to see a race on the Sunday, where someone storms from the back of the grid to take the win.

Thusly, you have a problem with qualifying, in that you have to configure it so that there's some semblance of a race on the Sunday, without making it entirely arbitrary, or cheatable.

Max Mosley (widely regarded as an idiot) has been saying this for years. You can't spend two days lining the cars up so that the fastest is at the front, and then justifiably complain when there's no overtaking.

I wonder if a qualifing system like they use in the BTCC would work. That is the 10 places from the last race end up with a weight penalty with the 1st place getting largest weight and they also pick a number of cars to start behind the number 10 position.

I'm not sure that I've explained it very well but it makes for some exciting racing in the BTCC. I also think they should award some points for all the cars that finnish, whether it's just half a point or re-vise the whole points system. Especially when you have races like last weekend when only a dozen cars or so finish...

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I wonder how things would look if they just reversed the finishing positions from the last race.

 

[Danoff]

I wonder how things would look if they just reversed the finishing positions from the last race.

I was just wondering that very thing myself. But I don't think it would be very fair.

 

[Kylehnat]

I was just wondering that very thing myself. But I don't think it would be very fair.

No it wouldn't. When actually fighting for a "championship", you can't just arbitrarily set the grid.

Here's something that just popped into my head: How about keeping the first two sessions they way they are, and then for the third session, the top 10 cars do a single-car shootout session? (like qualifying a couple years ago). And get rid of the stupid fuel-load restrictions; let them run on fumes if they want. I want a straight fight in qualifying.

And I, too, am tired of seeing qualifying changing every few months. No other form of motorsport has such fickle rule changes.

 

[Danoff]

No it wouldn't. When actually fighting for a "championship", you can't just arbitrarily set the grid.

It wouldn't be arbitrary to reverse the order of the previous results to form the grid of the next race. It would be an attempt to give the slower guys more of a chance. But I generally don't like anything that penalizes success.

 

[wfooshee]

The whole point of this year's format was to put cars on the track during qualifying, which it does.

I saw the word "boring" in a previous post in this thread. Does nobody remember the boredom of watching an empty track for 48 minutes while the fast guys wait for the slow guys to clean the track? Then for sponsor satisfaction, they went to single-car, which absolutely sucked. Also boring.

I really like the current format, both for the traffic it generates, and the way people can get caught out if they miss something or time their session wrong. Traffic SHOULD be part of qualifying.

As for the last session being 15 minutes instead of 20, the 20 minutes was a careful plan, I think, based on fuel load to start the race, and how long it takes to burn it down for a quick lap or two on fresh tires at the end. Most races are 2 stops, and just under an hour and a half. 20 minutes is less than a third of a race, but not by much. 15 minutes is a significant difference if you look at it that way.

 

[Carl.]

I saw the word "boring" in a previous post in this thread. Does nobody remember the boredom of watching an empty track for 48 minutes while the fast guys wait for the slow guys to clean the track? Then for sponsor satisfaction, they went to single-car, which absolutely sucked. Also boring.

I wasn't comparing it to how it was in the past. I did like single car qualifying, as we could clearly see the differences in each driver/car performance for a whole lap, or any errors made. Heck, even seeing Minardi working very hard to keep their cars under control was fun. That said, It must have sucked for onsite spectators.

Back to this year's 3rd session, seeing Formula1 racers cruising around the track below their limits to burn fuel is about as as exciting as watching paint dry. I'd rather watch any backmarker going all out, alone on the track than 10 800hp racecars cruising around a circuit in order to burn fuel. The rule change means we'll have less cruising, and that'll also put more pressure on the drivers to set good times earlier in the last session.

Other than that, I do like the "shuffling" effects that the new format has, but I could do without fuel restrictions for the last session. In a perfect world, the field would be close enough so that we woudn't need such measures to make races more exciting.

 

[Kylehnat]

I saw the word "boring" in a previous post in this thread. Does nobody remember the boredom of watching an empty track for 48 minutes while the fast guys wait for the slow guys to clean the track?

You know, F1 is the only sport where teams deliberately find ways to keep the cars in the garage as long as possible. ChampCar has a similar format (30 minute open session), and it's usually quite entertaining, BECAUSE TEAMS LET THE DRIVERS GO! In Formula One, the driver is expected to go out, put one blistering lap in the books, and head back to the pits. Let's get rid of this damn engine rule, shall we?

 

[wfooshee]

You know, F1 is the only sport where teams deliberately find ways to keep the cars in the garage as long as possible. ChampCar has a similar format (30 minute open session), and it's usually quite entertaining, BECAUSE TEAMS LET THE DRIVERS GO! In Formula One, the driver is expected to go out, put one blistering lap in the books, and head back to the pits. Let's get rid of this damn engine rule, shall we?

Hear! Hear!

The 'cost-cutting' engine rule is the root of all this evil.

 

[dkstz]

Yeah, I'm gonna be flamed, still I want to see what it turns out.

What if: Reverse order from the championship standings.

Promises a pass or two IN TRACK...

 

[darkfinal]

Yeah, I'm gonna be flamed, still I want to see what it turns out.

What if: Reverse order from the championship standings.

Promises a pass or two IN TRACK...

Again, the objective of F1 teams is to win the championship, not keeping the spectators entertained... that's an issue of the F1 organization itself.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

You know, F1 is the only sport where teams deliberately find ways to keep the cars in the garage as long as possible. ChampCar has a similar format (30 minute open session), and it's usually quite entertaining, BECAUSE TEAMS LET THE DRIVERS GO! In Formula One, the driver is expected to go out, put one blistering lap in the books, and head back to the pits. Let's get rid of this damn engine rule, shall we?

Correct!! +Rep.

 

[amp88]

You know, F1 is the only sport where teams deliberately find ways to keep the cars in the garage as long as possible. ChampCar has a similar format (30 minute open session), and it's usually quite entertaining, BECAUSE TEAMS LET THE DRIVERS GO! In Formula One, the driver is expected to go out, put one blistering lap in the books, and head back to the pits. Let's get rid of this damn engine rule, shall we?

I agree with you in that the waiting isn't really a great spectacle, but getting rid of the engine rule wouldn't make a lot of difference to the situation. The teams get 7 sets of the single compound of tyre they choose for the weekend. It wouldn't make sense for the mid or top end teams to go out for two runs in the first and second sessions if they could get through with just one run. Look back to the 60 minute, 12 lap maximum qualifying sessions we used to have. The top teams would usually do two or three runs going out early to put in a reasonable banker lap or two and then go out late on to put in a full attack run. There wasn't an engine rule or penalty then.

7 sets of tyres (6 new sets once you've used one of the sets to choose what compound you want) don't stretch very far in a weekend when you've got to set the car up through Free Practice, do the 3 sessions of qualifying (though if you're one of the top teams you can get through quali with only 1 or two new sets used) and then race (hoping to have at least two and ideally three sets of new tyres if you're on a two stopper). There's always going to be a limiting factor at some point in the chain. It just happens to be the engine now, but take away the engine rule and it'll be the tyres.

 

[sausages]

I don't like the idea of basing grid positions or qualifying order on any kind of previous result or standings. Last year we had the winner of the previous race being the last to qualify - thus with the best track conditions. If you have a bad result in a race then, it can take you 3 or 4 races to get back to your normal/rightful position and if you keep winning, it's even easier to keep on winning as the qualifying system works to your advantage.
The slate should be wiped clean for each race IMO - anything else isn't fair, whichever way round it is.

Also, the idea of reversing positions would probably be highly dangerous - the consequences of having rows of Super Aguris and Midlands with inexperienced drivers at the front and much faster cars weaving around behind them into the first corner don't bear thinking about. Aside from that, with all the rule-exploiting in F1, it would probably encourage teams to retire their cars ASAP if it looked like they weren't on for a point in order to gain grid position at the next race.

This year's format is just far too intricate - try explaining to an F1 novice how it works and you just sound plain daft.

I guess that leaves the old way - 1 hour, 12 laps, no fuel restrictions etc - sounds good to me 👍

 

[DLRgian]

It is changed because Ferrari is starting to come alive again

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

This year's format is just far too intricate - try explaining to an F1 novice how it works and you just sound plain daft.

I think any person with a brain should be able to understand the format, especially if they're interested in F1.

 

[zoxxy]

I miss the old qualifying, where all cars bash out to set the fastest time during a 20 min session. THERE'S your excitement.

 

[amp88]

This year's format is just far too intricate - try explaining to an F1 novice how it works and you just sound plain daft.

I disagree. I've explained it to several novices without trouble.

 

[sausages]

Well, I'm not saying that people won't understand it, but I've not spoken to anyone who doesn't think it's absurdly convoluted.

I'm not really opposed to multiple knockout mini-sessions (even though they just seem like an artificial way to create excitement), but the fuel restrictions and fuel credit system should be abandoned.
Any qualifying format where the driver qualifying in 14th place posts a faster time than the driver in 4th place (see Canadian GP) suggests that F1 has begun to disappear up it's own rectum.

 

[DLRgian]

This type is interesting. But I enjoyed more the 1hr session and driver gets 12 laps in that hour. It would be nice to see the 12 laps plus if your on a hot lap and the time runs out you can still finish that lap and it will count.

 

[Pupik]

I don't understand why the qualifying format ever had to change; it was fine from the early days of racing until about 1996, when the 2-day rule was scrapped in favor of a single day of qualifying. Suddenly, we needed to force 12 laps (your pit-in laps and pit-out laps counted, too). This rule didn't halp anyone, since the sharpest end of the grid usually took less total laps to set quick times. Practice times became shorter, less qualifying, it gives the spectator less.

The big push was live qualifying, now Bernie wants to make it more of a "race" within a race so that ardent F1 fans will stay hooked to their TV. But constantly keeping up with the latest method of qualifying is incredibly confusing to explain. Yes, it's more of a race, than a car parade, but it also smacks tradition in the head and doesn't put the fastest drivers where they should be: In the order of who had the fastest, and then following fastest lap, et al. Period.

Guess what? The racing isn't any better than before, you jackasses.

This is disturbing to me; the powers that be in Europe claim to have this sence of tradition and preservation, yet destroy older, simple methods of setting up a motor race, flippantly decide that perfectly good race track can no longer be used, since it's pits and complexes are "archaic" literally overnight. Old race courses and tracks are vandalized by public works, fixtures like grandstands and timing booths are removed to make way for housing developments...it's all so effing depressing, that's what.