Qualifying

[Mark]

Lets get rid of the 'race fuel' qualifying. Make teams nominate how much fuel they want to use in the race before the qualifying session starts, then get the cars out there on low fuel loads doing the fastest laps possible.

Futhermore, give a point for pole position.

[Valve Bounce]

Lets get rid of the 'race fuel' qualifying. Make teams nominate how much fuel they want to use in the race before the qualifying session starts, then get the cars out there on low fuel loads doing the fastest laps possible.

Futhermore, give a point for pole position.

My point is: why should teams nominate anything before the race? Why can't they make up their mind what pit stop strategy to use around half an hour before the race and what tyres to choose? I already posted this on another thread - the first 15 minutes of Q3 is a farce. Let them all have 4 timed laps in Q3, 2 in the first 15 minutes and 2 in the second 15 minutes. Let them all qualify on low fuel.

[wedge]

I wouldn't want to go back to them days as it was in the late 1990s-2003 when qualy was the highlight of the weekend and dull races races.

There were many races where team-mates qualified next to each because the fastest cars were at the front and disappeared off into the distance and everyone on a one-stopper for most races because its the optimum strategy.

Arrows used to be adventurous by two stopping - yes they passed a lot cars but eventually ended finishing where they started.

It's the race itself that earns you the points, not qualifying. What F1 needs is elements of unpredicatability. We don't want predicatable boring races.

I like the current format. Its a good compromise. At least there's real excitement with the qualy system that we have now.

We'll never see reverse grids in F1 but fuel ballast is almost the next best thing. The only time I'll be happy to see low fuel qualy is single one lap qualy.

Ultimately, the two biggest problems in F1 is aero and refuelling/pit strategy.

[ioan]

My point is: why should teams nominate anything before the race? Why can't they make up their mind what pit stop strategy to use around half an hour before the race and what tyres to choose? I already posted this on another thread - the first 15 minutes of Q3 is a farce. Let them all have 4 timed laps in Q3, 2 in the first 15 minutes and 2 in the second 15 minutes. Let them all qualify on low fuel.

Q3 is only 15 minutes long! :p :

[janneppi]

Q3 is only 15 minutes long! :p :
Usually the fastest times are set after the clock has stopped. :p :

[ioan]

Usually the fastest times are set after the clock has stopped. :p :

You mean in the last 15 minutes?! :D

[tinchote]

I wouldn't want to go back to them days as it was in the late 1990s-2003 when qualy was the highlight of the weekend and dull races races.

There were many races where team-mates qualified next to each because the fastest cars were at the front and disappeared off into the distance and everyone on a one-stopper for most races because its the optimum strategy.

Arrows used to be adventurous by two stopping - yes they passed a lot cars but eventually ended finishing where they started.

It's the race itself that earns you the points, not qualifying. What F1 needs is elements of unpredicatability. We don't want predicatable boring races.

I like the current format. Its a good compromise. At least there's real excitement with the qualy system that we have now.

We'll never see reverse grids in F1 but fuel ballast is almost the next best thing. The only time I'll be happy to see low fuel qualy is single one lap qualy.

Ultimately, the two biggest problems in F1 is aero and refuelling/pit strategy.


What you are saying is not very coherent. The current system is making almost all the cars to be on the same strategy. The current question during the race is not how many stops the leaders will make, but rather if they will stop two laps earlier or not. And that's caused by the current qualy system.

And, by the way, what's wrong with qualy being exciting? I don't see the problem. For many years I woke up on Saturdays at 4 or 5am (and the qualy used to be always an hour earlier than the race) to watch the qualy. It was an exciting crescendo of events that led to the frantic last minutes. It was great. Now, I've stopped watching it more than a year ago.

[wedge]

What you are saying is not very coherent. The current system is making almost all the cars to be on the same strategy. The current question during the race is not how many stops the leaders will make, but rather if they will stop two laps earlier or not. And that's caused by the current qualy system.

No. You can either have low fuel and go for a better grid position or run a heavier fuel load and try to overtake/pit-pass cars.

With the old system it was about how big your fuel tank was because most races was a one-stopper.


And, by the way, what's wrong with qualy being exciting? I don't see the problem. For many years I woke up on Saturdays at 4 or 5am (and the qualy used to be always an hour earlier than the race) to watch the qualy. It was an exciting crescendo of events that led to the frantic last minutes. It was great. Now, I've stopped watching it more than a year ago.

I don't have a problem with qualy being exciting. What I don't like is seeing the cars qualifying on outright speed, running off into the distance and suffering with boring processional races.

[ioan]

I don't have a problem with qualy being exciting. What I don't like is seeing the cars qualifying on outright speed, running off into the distance and suffering with boring processional races.

You know I think they called it qualifying exactly because of that, they needed only the fastest cars to qualify for the race, not the ones with less fuel in the tank! :rolleyes:

[Dave B]

For fifty years, the best driver in the best car set the fastest lap and took pole.

Then it all started going a bit wonky...

[inimitablestoo]

I can feel a "Get rid of race fuel in qualifying" petition coming on... :p :

I'd certainly sign; the rule may have brought about a few strange strategies early on, but everyone got wise to it pretty quickly. I'd either make Q3 a carbon copy of the first two parts, or bring back the one-shot system for the top ten only. But then if I was running F1 I'd have more than the current 24-car limit (about 30 if I had to have a limit) and qualifying would actually mean something because the 26-car grid limit would still be in force.

Oh yes, and I would award a point for pole, but only if we could change the system to the old WRC 20-15-12-10-8-6-4-3-2-1 system. Which I would. But then that's the subject of another thread already...

[tinchote]

With the old system it was about how big your fuel tank was because most races was a one-stopper.


You gotta be kidding. In 98-99, guessing which strategy each team was using was always there. And very rarely were most cars on a one-stopper. And I remember MS winning France with 4 stops in 04 (I think). I remember MS winning in Hungary with three stops over the Mac's two. One stop the rule? You gotta be kidding.



I don't have a problem with qualy being exciting. What I don't like is seeing the cars qualifying on outright speed, running off into the distance and suffering with boring processional races.

Well, now we have boring qualy and boring processional races.

[Mark]

Quite often in the mid-90's you would see the likes of the Williams qualify on pole position because they were excellent in low fuel and qualifying trim, but then Benetton would win the race because they were superior in race trim and could work the strategy better.

[ArrowsFA1]

For fifty years, the best driver in the best car set the fastest lap and took pole.

Then it all started going a bit wonky...
:up:

[Valve Bounce]

I don't have a problem with qualy being exciting. What I don't like is seeing the cars qualifying on outright speed, running off into the distance and suffering with boring processional races.


Well yeah!! let's put the slower cars up front - will that be more in line with what you'd like to see?

[Ranger]

For fifty years, the best driver in the best car set the fastest lap and took pole.

Then it all started going a bit wonky...
You said it. :up:

[ShiftingGears]

I don't have a problem with qualy being exciting. What I don't like is seeing the cars qualifying on outright speed, running off into the distance and suffering with boring processional races.

The current qualifying system is quite conceited and is an artificial way of trying to improve the show, mostly because the current F1 cars aren't proper racing cars, and Bernie and Max need to retire. Qualifying is about being the fastest, and Dave Brockman hit the nail on the head with this one.

[wedge]

Quite often in the mid-90's you would see the likes of the Williams qualify on pole position because they were excellent in low fuel and qualifying trim, but then Benetton would win the race because they were superior in race trim and could work the strategy better.

Refuelling was introduced in 1994. It wasn't until the 1995 Italian GP where Benetton one-stopped Johnny Herbert and won the race (though due to Hill's misdemeanour on Schumi). That was when team cottoned on to doing long first stints.

And yes, there are anomolies where multiple stints are feasible. You really need a driver like Schumi to make it work because you have to drive absolutely on the limit on every stint and because you lose so much time making a pitstop, going in and out of the pits.


Well yeah!! let's put the slower cars up front - will that be more in line with what you'd like to see?

In some ways, yes. F1 is difficult to overtake as it is with having the fastest cars at the head of the grid.

Massa was voted 'driver of the race' at Silverstone, Suzuka 2005 seems to be everyones favourite race in recent times and yet when I say we should have a topsy turvy grid for entertaining races, everyone laughs at me!


The current qualifying system is quite conceited and is an artificial way of trying to improve the show, mostly because the current F1 cars aren't proper racing cars, and Bernie and Max need to retire. Qualifying is about being the fastest, and Dave Brockman hit the nail on the head with this one.

You can't just blame Max Mosley. You can also point your finger at the the manufacturers and the likes of Ron Dennis who want to keep aero as the final bastion of innovative freedom in F1 and wanting F1 to be the pinnacle of technology. Look at the proposals for the next generation GP cars - stricter aero rules but reintroduction of silly driver aids which will increase grip/handling and reduce braking zones and therefore less overtaking.

[Garry Walker]

Lets get rid of the 'race fuel' qualifying.
Agreed, but then again - The system we have now means that slower cars at least have some sort of a chance


Make teams nominate how much fuel they want to use in the race before the qualifying session starts, then get the cars out there on low fuel loads doing the fastest laps possible.
Absolutely not. Let them pick how much fuel they want for race, before the race.



Futhermore, give a point for pole position.
I disagree

[ShiftingGears]

Suzuka 2005 seems to be everyones favourite race in recent times and yet when I say we should have a topsy turvy grid for entertaining races, everyone laughs at me!
You can't just blame Max Mosley. You can also point your finger at the the manufacturers and the likes of Ron Dennis who want to keep aero as the final bastion of innovative freedom in F1 and wanting F1 to be the pinnacle of technology. Look at the proposals for the next generation GP cars - stricter aero rules but reintroduction of silly driver aids which will increase grip/handling and reduce braking zones and therefore less overtaking.

Yes but the grid at Suzuka 2005 was a result of chance in qualifying and not a contrived gimmick. And there are other influences in F1, but Mad Max is the one in the end who gives the nod.

[555-04Q2]

Bring back the old 1 hour, 12 laps per driver system. Used to give me 40 minutes to get my snacks ready and beers cold before watching an exciting 20 minutes of 20 odd cars trying to set fastest lap around each other :up:

[tinchote]

Bring back the old 1 hour, 12 laps per driver system. Used to give me 40 minutes to get my snacks ready and beers cold before watching an exciting 20 minutes of 20 odd cars trying to set fastest lap around each other :up:


:up:

[janneppi]

I'd like to see 30 minute free quali after which top ten goes one car at a time for the final standings.
I miss not seeing all the top laps like in the previous quali system.

[Firstgear]

All the cars carry ballast to bring them up to min. weight. Why not reduce the amount of ballast in exchange for bigger fuel tanks. Fuel the cars right up with no fuel stops during the race. Now you'll have the fastest at the front without the fuel strategy crap. I'm sure at least one driver (Albers) would agree with the bigger tanks/no refueling.

[ioan]

Bring back the old 1 hour, 12 laps per driver system. Used to give me 40 minutes to get my snacks ready and beers cold before watching an exciting 20 minutes of 20 odd cars trying to set fastest lap around each other :up:

That's the way to go, the system that was right for so long! :up:

[jso1985]

I still think one-lap-qualy without race fuel would be much better.

or anything without race fuel!

[truefan72]

All the cars carry ballast to bring them up to min. weight. Why not reduce the amount of ballast in exchange for bigger fuel tanks. Fuel the cars right up with no fuel stops during the race. Now you'll have the fastest at the front without the fuel strategy crap. I'm sure at least one driver (Albers) would agree with the bigger tanks/no refueling.
ridiculous

why don't we have them drive buses on the track each with 20 people, that will show us who is the fastest.

That's not F1. The cars, drivers and aero all perform differently from team to team. Some cars perform better than others with a heavier fuel load,
there are a countless number of variables that go into a race day set up.

The driver is about 55% of the equation in the perfomance of the car.
Frankly, save having all the drivers drive the exact same car and exact same set-up, there will be no telling who the fastest driver is. Even then, some drivers will perform worse if not in their ideal set-up.

[Hawkmoon]

People complain about "pit passing" in F1 yet I hear very few calls for the banning of refuelling in races. If they don't stop for fuel, we can forget all about "strategy" and let the fastest guy win. Sure, we'll get the odd lights to flag win but so what. We've got that now, only with a couple of meaningless pitstops thrown in.

I say ban refuelling but keep tyre stops and give the drivers two tyres with very different performance characteristics. One hard but slow and durable and the other extremely fast but short lived.

Some drivers will decide to take the steady approach and do the whole race on the hard tyres without stopping. Others will swap between the two types as the situation demands.

Whatever happens, we have to get rid of race fuel in qualifying. It was a bad idea in 2003 and it's still a bad idea.

[Ranger]

People complain about "pit passing" in F1 yet I hear very few calls for the banning of refuelling in races.
That's because that's in theory only a band-aid solution. The reason people complain about pitpassing is because passing still isn't happening on-track, where it should.

[rabf1]

"What I don't like is seeing the cars qualifying on outright speed, running off into the distance and suffering with boring processional races."

We have "boring processional races" now most of the time. If there was an easy answer we wouldn't be talking about this. I think they are going in the right direction with qualifying now. Even if they let them go on whatever fuel they want in Q3 it is still going to come down to the last minute to see who wins the pole. The way they do it now helps make the race a little bit better. The real solution is to change the specifications for the cars to make passing easier, but nobody can seem to figure out how to do that. Getting rid of TC is a start so lets see how it goes next year.

[schmenke]

... I'd ... make Q3 ... (a) one-shot system for the top ten only. ...

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. The current Q3 session is essentially this anyways :mark: