F1 format (points, races, etc…): Should we move to a GP2-style season?
5th July 2012, 10:49 at 10:49 am #131643
Discussion on the current F1 season’s point structure, and race structure. This will then be contrasted with the point structure and race structure (two races in one weekend, one with reversed starting grid), of that in GP2.
Note: I’m sure you are all up-to-date with the structures in F1. But if you are not sure about the GP2 structure, please have a read of THIS
For those who may not be able to view the link for some reason, here is an extract. This is what I personally think we should move over to in F1;
Weekend format and points allocation
A race weekend is composed of one half hour practice session and one half hour qualifying session, followed by two races.
The qualifying session is a straight fight for fastest laptime, and determines the order of the grid for Race 1. In a change of regulations in 2012, four points are awarded for pole position.
Race 1 is run over 170km or 60 minutes, and each driver must complete one compulsory pitstop in which a minimum of two tyres must be changed.
In a change of regulations in 2012, the top ten drivers score points (25, 18, 15, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2, 1) with two points being awarded to the driver who set the fastest lap of the race.
The grid for Race 2 is determined by the finishing order of the first race, with the top 8 positions reversed. Race 2 is run over 120km or 45 minutes, with no pitstops allowed.
In a change of regulations in 2012, the top eight finishers score points (15, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2, 1) and the driver who sets the fastest lap scores two points.
Any driver who is not classified in the top ten positions at the end of the race or, didn’t start the race from his normal grid position or, changed tyres during race two at a time when climatic conditions did not necessitate the use of a different specification of tyre, will not be eligible for points awarded for fastest lap.5th July 2012, 11:02 at 11:02 am #205132
No, no, no, no and no again. It would be an absolute disaster. The final straw in the dumbing-down of F1. If anything they should keep the current format but make the races longer.5th July 2012, 11:09 at 11:09 am #205133
The major reason I feel as though we should move over to the GP2 series’ format is to bunch up the field some more, and get some more spectacular racing.
It seems weird that I am saying this during the closest and most spectacular season in a long time, but I’ve thought long and hard about this. It is only so close this season because the technical regulations have remained rather constant for a few years.
I expect there to be very large difference in times between the cars in 2014, when the new engines, and technical regulations come in to play. So I guess this is more my vision for 2014 and beyond.
I don’t want 2014 to come, and for one team to be 6tenths faster at every circuit. 2010 was no fun for me. Not because I’m not an RBR or Vettel fan, but because to be honest in most races we were just watching a race for second place…
Race 1 is one for the pedal-to-the-metal type racers and spectators alike. An hour of drivers really really going at it, making daring overtakes etc.
Race 2 is one for the driver’s with a softer touch and a bit more brainpower. Watching for when a driver knows when to attack, and when to give the tyres a break.
Two very different races, two very different grids. But I think both would lend great spectacle to us viewers, and F1 as a whole.
The two points for fastest laps is okay I guess. I’m nonplussed about it. Keep it leave it, doesn’t bother me.
Note: Due to the top 8 grid reversal in Race 2, there might even be a case for eliminating DRS for the second race. However, that would depend on the season’s car aerodynamics.
Please let me know what you think of the whole F1–>GP2 idea. What you would borrow from GP2, what you wouldn’t etc etc.
Thanks for reading guys.
Look forward to hearing your opinions!! :)5th July 2012, 11:10 at 11:10 am #205134
@tlfb If anything, the GP2 format is a lot more complex than the F1 format…5th July 2012, 11:20 at 11:20 am #205135
This is what I personally think we should move over to in F1
Why? It’s compeltely pointless.5th July 2012, 11:23 at 11:23 am #205136
I outlined why in my second post. And if you disagree, fair enough but please explain why? Cheers5th July 2012, 11:25 at 11:25 am #205137
Formula One is fine the way it is, sprint and feature races would dumb the sport down in my opinion. Closing the field and “the show” are not the only things important in Formula One. Things like technological advancements are just as, if not more important. If you only care about the show, then NASCAR would appeal more to you I think.5th July 2012, 11:32 at 11:32 am #205138
Actually not, there are quite a few more points to be gained pr. weekend with the GP2 style point system.. All right. Sorry it was bad.
On topic now, no I don’t think reverse grids make any sort of sense.
It is one of the most unnatural type of racing you can find. We might as well stop qualifying all together and draw the drivers names from a hat at each grid spot to determine the grid.
I see that it can be boring when the teams with the fastest car always wins, but you know what? Thats because they have been better then the others. Therefore they should be equally rewarded for their exceptional effort.5th July 2012, 11:37 at 11:37 am #205139
Actually @timi I think you’re wrong, technical changes make the teams closer, like in 2009. It levels the playing field again. And where’s the enjoyment in watching ‘artificially entertaining’ races like there would be under a GP2 format? It would just make F1 even more of an unsport, like the DRS is already doing.5th July 2012, 11:38 at 11:38 am #205140
I outlined why in my second post. And if you disagree, fair enough but please explain why?
Because it doesn’t add anything to the sport that the sport doesn’t already have. There is no need for Formula 1 to adopt the GP2 system, because then it wouldn’t be Formula 1.5th July 2012, 11:46 at 11:46 am #205141
No way. GP2’s reversed grid for a short race makes winners out of muppets like Palmer and Cecotto.
Also, F1 drivers will always be held back from going flat out, because of the cost-saving rhetoric and the need to preserve long-life engines, gearboxes etc as well as tyres. I guess there’s a tradition of an endurance element in F1, and shortening the races hasn’t been that popular in recent surveys like those FIA ones.
But I do share some of your concerns over the 2014 rules. I hope overtaking doesn’t just become a matter of cranking up the boost and blasting past. There’d be no skill and no defending, like an easy pass in a badly-thought-out DRS zone.5th July 2012, 11:55 at 11:55 am #205142
@Bullfrog To be fair, Cecotto’s win came from pole position deservedly achieved in qualifying, but on the whole I agree that the GP2 system rewards drivers for basically not being good enough and not doing well enough in the first race. F1 should be about the best driver and team combination winning, not whoever finished eighth in the previous race getting pole for the next.5th July 2012, 12:33 at 12:33 pm #205143
If you want so close racing, watch GP2 or WTCC or Indycar. Formula One is not about entertainment, it’s about the best, the most extreme. It’s not about giving everyone the same car and equal opportunities; it’s about pushing designers and teams to the max. It’s about giving drivers a chance to develop their car into a better one. It’s about cars that defy the laws of automotives in performance. It’s about being creative, inventive and smart.
Smart, not only in design, but also in strategy. If you can’t win on speed, simply try to outsmart the rest. If you don’t have the speed in qualifying, save your tyres and have a better race.
It’s about the best drivers in the world being pushed to take what they are given. It is about showing why you’re the best by attacking every race with the aim of being 20 seconds faster than the rest, it is about showing why you’re a great driver by overcoming errors you have made before and fighting back.
KERS and DRS are there only to overcome a flaw in all these extreme performances; the fastest driver and the fastest car will still be miles ahead. Formula One is not like school, where everyone is special and the level is lowered just so everyone can participate.
Formula One is about being the best, no matter how, no matter what it takes. And if that means that we have 5 drivers going into the final race with a chance to win the championship, than so it is. But if it means that almost 75% of all pole positions are taken by one driver, that is also Formula One.
If you want to play nice, go watch something else. Formula One is about pushing to the limit.5th July 2012, 12:34 at 12:34 pm #205144
Who is “we”? Is “we” us? Why or how would be bother/manage to do that?5th July 2012, 12:51 at 12:51 pm #205145
I can only agree with @tflb1 – it’s completely unnecessary.
Do I want to see championships decided during qualifiyng by the driver who sets pole?
Do I want to see drivers not trying to overtake and instead dropping back to try to set a fast lap to get extra points?
Do we need to dilute the value of a Grand Prix by splitting it into two races?
Do we need to artificially spice up races with reverse grids?
No on every count.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.