Groups

The most stupid type of qualifying? (33 posts)

Viewing post 16 to 30 (33 total posts)

← 1 2 3 →

kinggp said 2 years, 9 months ago:

i do like the current f1 qualifying, however to improve it, you could say that from the start of qualifying cars must fuel up for the entire session, so you could have cars with little fuel going fast straight away if they dont expect to get out of q1 and heavier cars struggling through. this could give mixed up grids and also provide more competitive racing with overtaking as the slower cars could be ahead of faster cars thanks to the fuels loads.

e.g. say virgin fuel for 5 laps and then cant add more fuel again, they would have a lighter car and could get out of q1 but red bull know they could get to pole so would need more fuel so about 15 laps to set a time in every session, so cars could get surprised and knocked out early resulting in mixed up grids.

#
Ned Flanders said 2 years, 9 months ago:

Yes that is an interesting idea actually, although it would backfire a bit if it meant lots of cars ran out of fuel early and had to sit out the session.

But still, if as predicted F1 gradually begins to put more emphasis on fuel conservation in the future, this sort of idea would be even more apporpriate. Kinggp I like your thinking!

#
paulgilb said 2 years, 9 months ago:

For reference, here is a summary of different qualifying systems used (as far as I can remember them!):

1995 and before: 1 hour on Friday, 1 hour on Saturday, 12 laps in each session (including in and out laps), fastest lap overall counted. Low fuel.

1996-2002: 1 hour session on Saturday, drivers limited to 12 laps. Low fuel.

2003: Single-lap shootout on Friday (can�t remember how order was decided) to determine order for Saturday. Single lap shootout on Saturday for the grid. Race fuel on Saturday.

2004: First shootout was now on Saturday, order decided by finishing order from previous race (winner going first). Race fuel in final qualifying.

2005, first 6 races: 1 lap on Saturday, 1 lap on Sunday, grid position decided by total of two laptimes. Low fuel on Saturday, race fuel on Sunday (?).

2005, rest of season: Single lap on Saturday with race fuel, order determined by finishing order in previous race (winner going last).

2006, initially: 3 sessions of 15-15-20 minutes, losing 6 cars in each first 2 sessions (on low fuel). Final part took place on race fuel, with drivers receiving the fuel back that they had used in Q3 (provided the laptime was fast enough). In first 2 sessions, laps only counted if they were finished within 15 minutes.

2006, subsequently: Final part reduced to 15 minutes, laps only had to be started before the flag in Q1 and Q2.

2007-09: Q1 extended to 20 mins, Q2 reduced to 10 mins. Fuel not returned after qualifying.

2010: Q3 became low fuel, drivers have to start the race on the tyres with which they set their fastest lap.

#
johnp235 said 2 years, 9 months ago:

“That’s only because we happen to have three new teams. Last year, when 5 were eliminated it wasn’t predictable at all. And it won’t be predictable once the Lotuses, Virgins and HRTs catch up to the established teams.”

Yes, I realise that – but I think the FIA should have realised that too, and not upped it to 7 cars being eliminated. As Ned Flanders says, if they’d left it at 5, there would have been some real prestige to being the “new-team-driver” who made it beyond Q1, far more than seeing which of the “old-team-drivers” drops out in the current system.

#
scunnyman said 2 years, 9 months ago:

I’m surprised nobody mentioned any other forms of qualifying from other forms of motorsport

#
jihelle said 2 years, 9 months ago:

I like the way GP2 goes. Two points awarded for fastest time in qualifying then two races (one short without pit stops, one long with pit stops) with reverse order on the starting grid for the second race (I would exend it to the first ten spots rather than eight as it is the case for GP2 now). More racing, more overtaking… all what F1 needs.

#
Dan Thorn said 2 years, 9 months ago:

I personally hate anything to do with reverse grids – I find it a bit artificial. You can also end up with a scenario where drivers are deliberately trying to finish the first race in such a position so that they are up the front for the second race, which isn’t racing at all. In the BTCC a few years ago the problem got so out of hand they introduced a lottery system so that now no-one knows where the grid is going to be reversed for the third race, which is even more ridiculous.

#
KateM said 2 years, 9 months ago:

I forgot about the 20 minute Q3 and the “get fuel back” in 2006. That was a bit rubbish, the drivers would just cruise around slowly for the first 10 minutes or so to burn fuel, which was very dull. It needed a bit of tweaking to get the knock out qualifying right!

#
Prisoner Monkeys said 2 years, 9 months ago:

Here’s an idea in case the knockout system ever gets boring: one-on-one qualifying. It would see the cars trundle out in the reverse order of their fastest practice times across the three sessions. So, basically, Sakon Yamamoto would be the first driver out. He would set his lap time, and stay out as Bruno Senna took to the circuit. If Senna beats Yamamoto’s lap time, he stays out and Yamamoto pits. If Senna does not beat Yamamoto’s time, then he is knocked out. Then Lucas di Grassi would take to the circuit, and the same deal arises. Whoever sets the fastest time gets to stay out and face the next driver. If someone has a bad run – say they spin – then they would be added to the pile in the appropriate place. If Timo Glock goes out to challenge di Grassi and spins, Glock does not qualify ahead of the Hispanias unless he is quicker than them. The idea behind all of this is that the faster driver earns himself the right to another lap and another chance to set a faster time. Even if his first time is faster than his second, his first time is still counted. The trick behind all of this is that once a driver pits, he cannot return to the circuit, even if he is the faster driver. Teams will have to try and find a balance between fuel and tyres to allow a driver to stay out as long as possible, but without compromising his ability to set a fast lap.

#
karan01 said 2 years, 9 months ago:

I like how oval tracks do it, by average speed.

But I am not too fussed with a hour free for all, and I very much like the current system.

#
Dan Thorn said 2 years, 9 months ago:

Isn’t every qualifying session based on average speed, as Speed = Distance / Time?

#
Enigma said 2 years, 9 months ago:

@Dan He probably meant average speed of several laps (I think 4).

#
Dan Thorn said 2 years, 9 months ago:

Ah right – blame my lack of oval racing knowledge on that one then!

#
gabal said 2 years, 9 months ago:

Single lap qualifying of 2005 was horrible. If you had a DNF in a race you were fucked in next race as well because you will have to start the qualifying among the first drivers while track is still green and just because of that you would qualify lower then your car realisticaly can just becuase of having to qualify early in the session.

As of much hated 2 sessions for qualifying with combined time we saw in the first races of that season FOM copied without understanding the racing concept of FIS Alpine Skiing which works for decades. The thing is in alpine skiing the fresher the snow is the track is faster. So, in second race slower skiers can make up time and gain many positions (it isn’t uncommon to see a skier gain 10 places or more in second race because it drove a really good race on better track. As race progresses the faster skiers from first race must defend their time advantage and battle not only time but also more and more damaged track.

In F1 things are completely different, such form of qualifying would have worked much better if first sessions’s provisional pole sitter would go first and then others would have to attack his time with track advantage being on slower drivers from first session.

The present system is very good, exciting and I hope they won’t spoil it by tinkering with it too much. I won’t be sad to see ”you must start the race on the same tyre you qualified on” rule get scraped though.

#
Icthyes said 2 years, 8 months ago:

I’m really starting to notice now how bored I am with Q1. It’s 20 minutes long and only once this season has resulted in big names getting caught out, when it was raining in Malaysia. I agree with Ned, it should be shorter with less cars going out, sure drivers will complain about traffic in limited time but that’s F1 and with less cars going out there’s less chance they’ll fall out from their being ruined. I’d say:

Q1 10 mins, 4/6 of 24/26 go out
5 minutes’ break
Q2 10 mins 5 of 20 go out
5 minutes’ break
Q3 10 mins 5 of 15 go out
5 minutes’ break
Q4 10 mins pole position shoot-out

Also I’d change the tyre rules. Pirelli bring the two compounds before, and the top 10 have to start the race on the same compound (not set) of tyres they started on. For the race, no tyre change is mandatory. So you’d see the Top 10 go for the soft tyres for grid position and then change, but everyone else go the whole race on the hard set; or you might see gambles on hard tyres in the Top 10, like Barrichello tried to do at Spa.

#