F1 2010 rules: A return to proper qualifying and real Grand Prix racing
19th August 2009, 19:35 by Keith Collantine 135 Comments »
Ayrton Senna won the last refuelling-free race at Adelaide in 1993
Surely the best news in the 2010 F1 rules is the confirmed return of low-fuel qualifying and a ban on in-race refuelling:
29.1 b) Refuelling during a race is forbidden.
2010 F1 Sporting Reguations
The needless and uninteresting complication of fuel strategy and and tedious race-fuel qualifying are being swept away. This is a return to proper Grand Prix racing.
F1 2010-style will be about who can manage the changing performance of their car over a 200-mile distance. The cars will start the race heavy with fuel, and be much quicker at the race’s end. It will also make races last longer.
We should see different drivers performing better at different stages of the race, instead of all the cars being optimised to work within a narrow performance window, giving little variation.
And, of course, the skill of the driver will mean much more to boot.
I’ve heard some people object to the banning of refuelling, saying ‘it brings another dimension’ the races. I’ve never felt refuelling brought anything other than a tedious diversion from where the action really takes place: on the track.
A clever strategy means little. But an exciting battle for position, a rapid lap, a bloody-minded defence of the lead for lap after lap – these are what make for great motor racing. I can’t wait for 2010.
Read more
Paul said on 19th August 2009, 19:37
I know you have made this point time and time again Keith, but this also greatly affects the state of qualifying.
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:07
Yeah I make no apologies for being a broken record about refuelling
Paul said on 19th August 2009, 20:36
For sure, I do too. I was but a child with a mild interest in motorsport when qualifying was last like this (as it will presumably be in 2010) so I am very much looking forward to it.
I just glanced over your article and I must have missed any mention of qualifying, which is impacted more than the race, even if the race itself is vastly more important.
Chalky said on 20th August 2009, 9:12
It’s going to be like the qualifying I grew up watching F1 was like. Fastest driver gets pole! I can’t wait.
…and no more explaining to the wife why the quickest driver on the grid is in 5th place.
Ronman said on 20th August 2009, 8:09
Well said Keith…. finally F1′s claims at cutting costs will be directly dealt with.
no refuel ling means less rigs to fly around the world, and less complications during the race.
now all that is left is Bridgestone offering one type of tire for all the circuits all season round. and F1′s regulation will be a little more closer to putting the driver back squarely at the tip of the fight…
dlaird said on 16th January 2010, 22:44
Thank god for the refuelling ban. It seems F1 is returning back to its roots of more exciting racing. I was so sick of “fuel strategy” playing a major part in the GP weekend. Now it will be more about who can manage the car better through a long race. Thats the way it should be. If you look back when there was no refueling (Mansell, Senna years) the racing was more exciting. It was more about the driver and car. Just can’t believe it took this long to ban refueling. Its going to be an interesting season8)
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 19:42
i really wish he were alive in 2003 but.. i’m sure he would have won it though. sigh
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 19:46
keith, i think 2010 will separate boys from the men. its a journey back to the golden era.
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:07
Fixed it
donwatters said on 19th August 2009, 19:43
More time on the track and less time in the pits equals better racing.
TommyB said on 19th August 2009, 23:15
Hopefully this’ll stop teams just waiting to overtake in the pits. If they qualify bad they will have to overtake ON TRACK to do well
Eamon said on 20th August 2009, 3:25
I hardly think that the teams wait to overtake in the pits. The drivers certainly try to get past if they’re quicker than the guy in front.
It’s very difficult, even this year with the new aero regs, to overtake on the track, and we’re most likely to see it happen when a driver has less fuel on board than the car he’s trying to pass.
I fear banning refueling will lead to race results being dictated by qualifying performances even more than they already are. Personally, I’m against it.
Andrew White said on 19th August 2009, 19:43
I think you mean 1993 in the picture caption, rather than 2003.
Andrew White said on 19th August 2009, 19:43
Ah, looks like someone got there first
Prisoner Monkeys said on 19th August 2009, 19:46
I likes what I hears. I’m disappointed that tyre-warmers are still in because I liked the idea that cars would handle differently with different fuel loads, tyre wear and tyre temperature – because it would be impossible to build a car that it always good – but it’s still an improvement. I also hope Bridgestone go back to their policy of supplying two non-sequential compunds the way they did at the start of the year.
Wow! He’d been dead nine years and he was still winning races! Spry for a dead fella.
Alpinestar said on 19th August 2009, 19:58
LOL made my day
Leaf said on 19th August 2009, 19:52
Something to look forward to. This really soes sound like a good package. Now, if the FIA can just keep their hands off of the rules for a few years.
Andrew White said on 19th August 2009, 19:59
Keith, see section 34.1 of the sporting regulations for definite proof that we are returning to proper qualifying.
“(During post qualifying parc ferme) fuel may be added or removed…”
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:25
Yeah it’s one of those odd things – it’s more useful to see what they’ve removed rather than what they’ve put in. This section that was in the 2009 rules is not in the 2010 rules:
Elliott said on 19th August 2009, 19:59
Keith, I’ve noticed in the last few months your level of proof-reading drop significantly. It’s disappointing when, in general, your articles rival major networks.
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:08
I know Elliot, standards have slipped a bit. I’m aware of it and am trying to get better.
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:23
nope, this site is as good as its ever been.
http://trends.google.com/websites?q=f1fanatic.co.uk%2C++jamesallenonf1.com&geo=all&date=all&sort=0
Mr James Allen’s blog is nowhere yo be seen.
keep up the great work keith.
sato113 said on 19th August 2009, 20:36
actually keith is brilliantly up to date and informing on everything. f1.com used to be my first stop for f1 news, now its here.
1994fanatic said on 19th August 2009, 21:12
Ditto, you’re doing an awesome job Keith. F1.com is as bland as Bernie. Even some of the stories inbetween races are good. I really liked the ones about drivers looking like others. Had me laughing on the floor when barrichello was compared to kelsey grammer.
GeeMac said on 20th August 2009, 11:15
This is the best F1 website I have come across. Now I only use F1.com for live timing of Friday Practice while I’m at work!
Keep up the good work.
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:52
Elliot are you from mars?
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:59
Never ever have i come across anyone criticizing such a great blog. we all owe it to Keith, Journeyer,Gman igor & the others guest writers, who make this blog the best place on the net.
graham228221 said on 20th August 2009, 12:46
I’ve gotta agree with Elliot, Keith’s blog is fantastic but unfortunately I’ve noticed quite a few errors littering his articles now.
Some people might not notice, but unfortunately I proof read as a hobby so stuff sticks out like a sorethumb!
mp4-19b said on 20th August 2009, 13:57
Are you from the james allen club?? This blog is a country mile ahead of all the formula 1 sites, including formula1.com & jamesallen blog. Keith is a human being & has a social life too. hope these criticisms do not demoralize him. keith, you are doing a wonderful job, infact this blog if one of the reasons i have subscribed for internet on my phone
mp4-19b said on 20th August 2009, 14:13
This is a remarkable site. The growth in number of readers really amazes me. I also think that many F1 journalists must learn from keith, from a humble beginning, this site is now the most popular f1 site in many countries . But some choose to be jealous. should i name them? i don’t think it would be appropriate though.
Just stop criticizing keith. if you really wish him well, i think it would be more appropriate for all the critics to do it via a private mail.
Dave said on 19th August 2009, 22:15
Nope, this site is a fantastic addition to other “rival” networks. Anyone noticed that sometimes Keith has posts about news before Autosport?
I’ve only been reading this site since the beginning of the year and it already is my first stop for F1 news. Some errors just make the sight feel it is run by a real person, who is really into F1. Mr M Walker made mistakes all the time and look at the legend he is!
Elliott said on 19th August 2009, 22:57
People, calm down. I wasn’t criticizing the quality of the articles or Keith, but the time taken to double check for errors. Keith, I love your work and you’re in my top 3 F1 websites I rely on.
I just hope that time can be found to catch the errors before publishing. I’m sure if Keith can’t personally do it due to time constraints, someone would be willing to help.
mp4-19b said on 20th August 2009, 3:25
i would be glad to offer my services in this regard
Ronman said on 20th August 2009, 8:32
Great Work Keith…. after all it’s a blog run by one man (i think) mistakes in publishing stories quickly to feed the commentators and hourly readers would put pressure on the best writers and proof readers. and with today’s technology corrections can be made in an instant…
what’s more is that most readers are very well informed on this site, and know that Keith is Ultra-well informed about the subject and mistakes, or typos i should say are taken at face value not interpreted as a weakness of any type on anyone’s part….
keep it up Keith…
p.s: I’m in the publishing business, and i know that little mistakes should sometimes be overlooked, just as a reader might miss-read a word, a writer can mistype it…
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:01
found this in ——–>
25.3 control of tyres
f)
The only permitted type of tyre heating are blankets which use resistive heating elements.are tyre warmers banned??
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:03
but it was stroked. did they change their mind at the last moment?
Alianora La Canta said on 19th August 2009, 20:04
Yes. The FIA tried to ban them for 2009 and failed. Looks like they have now succeeded.
Alianora La Canta said on 19th August 2009, 20:14
A striked-out line means the item has been deleted since the last version of the regulations. In other words, tyre warmers were permitted in 2009 but not in 2010 (unless something else in the regulations contradicts that interpretation).
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:11
The line isn’t crossed in the version I’m looking at.
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:26
this link was posted by Becken
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/755774E21C7A8B1DC12575B000326F7C/$FILE/1-2010%20F1%20SPORTING%20REGULATIONS%2006-05-2009.pdf
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:29
Those are not the 2010 rules published today, it’s the earlier version which has since been changed (for example, the cost cap portion has been deleted).
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:33
oh! it says it was published as on 6th may 2009. ok, tyre warmers are not banned then?
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:30
yep, i think its banned. found one more strike in article 27.4
tyre heating blanketPatrickl said on 19th August 2009, 21:24
I gave you the proper link in the other thread already, but here goes again:
http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulations/Pages/FIAFormulaOneWorldChampionship.aspx
Alianora La Canta said on 19th August 2009, 21:29
Mine neither. Did we get the early version of the PDF file or is something else amiss?
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 21:34
the pdf link posted by becken seems to be the old one. during the FIA-FOTA spat.
sato113 said on 19th August 2009, 22:42
guys please these are the LATEST versions-
tech regulations- http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/130A104E1769D120C1257617002D4CAE/$FILE/Stable%20Technical%20Regulations%20-%2024th%20July%20-%20CLEAN.pdf
sporting regulations-
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/3C9E78D2AAE9B15DC1257617002CF08F/$FILE/Stable%20Sporting%20Regulations%20-%2024%20July%20-%20CLEAN.pdf
Alianora La Canta said on 20th August 2009, 11:34
I have the new regulations and I’ve figured out what’s happened. The strike-out appears in the original 2010 Sporting Regulations dating back to April 3rd. Presumably it was carried over into the May 6th document (which is the one Becken linked to), but it is no longer struck out on the August 19th version.
In other words, the FIA was going to ban tyre warmers but they are now reinstated.
artorwar said on 19th August 2009, 20:15
Well I for one think that refueling is an essential part of F1. I know plenty will disagree but it’s a drivers job to manage fuel loads and it makes the teams job far more integral. If you think fuel strategies are tedious then I really dont know what to say, I think tactics are seldom tedious.
mp4-19b said on 19th August 2009, 20:50
managing of fuel becomes more critical with the introduction of the ban. remember the 80′s turbo equipped cars? most of them used to run out of fuel before the chequered flag. people like prost & piquet sr were masters at this. refuelinng ban is the best thing to have happened to f1. on a lighter note, we will get to see the poor old pit mechanics working in their shots
that would be sexy 
they can do away with all those fire-proof jackets.
Dave said on 19th August 2009, 20:17
About time too…
BS said on 19th August 2009, 20:17
Are they ditching the tire compound rules as well?
I started to like the idea of no refueling, as it really doesn’t add anything and usually only contributes to unexpected results due to mistakes. But if there is still a mandatory use of different compounds, if only by one tier, then we still won’t be able to see 2 hours of optimum racing and it will still be dominated by managing somebody else’s bad choice.
I really don’t see how bridgestone is still getting away with this rediculous rule, there is no reason for it other than keeping the word ‘tire’ in the broadcasts as much as possible. If they were to make all compounds closer together, different teams might perform best with different tires, which will make tire differences interesting rather than extemely annoying.
Keith Collantine said on 19th August 2009, 20:27
Nope the tyre rules are the same.
Baz said on 19th August 2009, 21:00
So cars will still be required to make a pit stop and drive on a set of useless tyres?
HounslowBusGarage said on 19th August 2009, 21:37
Yep! And that’s the really stupid bit.
Cars will start heavy with fuel and therefore use the harder grade of tyre to avoid destrying them too quickly.
Then as the car lightens, they will change onto the other type of tyre as required by the regulations.
So it may be that cars one-stop or two-stop the race, but they will almost all start on the harder tyres before changing to the softer ones.
So we will still have pit stop strategy, and drivers will still wait for the bloke in front to pull off into the pits instead of trying to pass him on the track.
I really can’t see the benefit.
Mouse_Nightshirt said on 20th August 2009, 2:44
I think it works better to be honest – it gives the drivers an option to use different compounds – harder tyres last longer, could you save a pitstop with it? Soft tyres are faster, might they give you an advantage big enough to clear another car?
It’s extra stuff for the driver to think about.
GB2009 said on 20th August 2009, 6:23
“So we will still have pit stop strategy, and drivers will still wait for the bloke in front to pull off into the pits instead of trying to pass him on the track.
I really can’t see the benefit.”
It will actually be the other way around now. It will be BETTER to be the first to stop, as essentially, everyone should be on roughly the same fuel load for the ENTIRE race, so stopping before the guy in front for new tyres, you can make a gain by running hard on the grippy new tyres before the other guy does, so you should, in theory, be able to leapfrog him as he will be on older rubber at the time you are pushing on the new stuff.
The length of stops will no longer be dictated by the amount of fuel going in either, which will actually make the work of the crew MORE important than is the case right now. They can easily get the 4 tyres changed before the fuel is finished, so lenght of stop is reflective of the fuel that goes in…now, it will be how quick the guys can change tyres, so there will actually be real-time gains to be made in stops on merit, not just through short-filling.
Accidentalmick said on 20th August 2009, 18:27
HBG
You dont often miss things but I think you have here.
Teams can predict, from the published weights, when their rivals are going to pit to refuel. They can then advise their drivers when to push and when to wait.
This prediction will be much more difficult to make regarding tyre wear.
gabal said on 19th August 2009, 20:37
I love this change as I think it will bring to better racing and move changing positions from pits to the track.
I don’t really care about fuel strategies and I’m glad they are getting rid of them.
sato113 said on 19th August 2009, 20:39
from autosport-
‘Tyre warmers will also be allowed, despite previous indications that they would be banned on cost-saving grounds.’
mfDB said on 19th August 2009, 20:45
I’m glad. I started watching 1987 and I preferred this type of racing and more importantly, I remember really loving the qualifying sessions.
I think this will be better for die hard fans and for the casual viewer. When my girlfriend (casual viewer, knows the teams and drivers) watches, see enjoys everything except the confusing and annoying change of order during the pit stops, she seems to really lose interest when a driver wins or advances just because of a pit stop strategy.
ABG said on 27th November 2009, 14:57
True ,,, i feel that Michael Schumacher became a 7 time WDC solely on pit stop strategies ..
Ban those and we see who is the fastest which we all want to know …
Right now can you seriously compare two top drivers on skill… Get eth pit stop strategies out of the picture and only the driver+car remain.. Great !!