planetf1.com

Anyone got any thoughts on this? I'm not sure I see the point really.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/a-four-pa ... -for-2019/

Qualifying is one of the things which most agree does not need changing. As you say, this seems a bit pointless.

yeah, it's just bizarre that they still want to fiddle with qualifying when that's one part of the weekend that doesn't get a lot of complaints. You'd think they'd learn from previous efforts

The cynic in me suggests it has a lot to do with more ad breaks between the sessions and more sponsors for each segment of qualifying. 'THE FAST 8 SESSION, BROUGHT TO YOU BY HEINEKEN' etc. Already we have sponsors on the little infographics on the side of the screen for apex speeds etc.

Seems like a slippery slope.

It's one of the most foolish ideas I've seen, and adds nothing. If they wanted to do a 4-part quali for some arbitrary reason, this isn't even the way I'd go about it.

What we have now works: look elsewhere for changes!

I struggle to see how this would be an improvement. It's just further diminishing the importance of each individual session.

There's nothing wrong with qualifying. Liberty may be new on the scene but there must be someone running the sport who remembers the embarrassing catastrophe the last time they tried to tinker with the format.

Tbh it's not too much of a change imo. I can give or take.

I would even open a 1 hour session where the guy with the best lap gets pole like in old times. But prolonging the agony like with this new format? It will be bring because some Haas or some Force India will fall out. Who cares?

Zoue wrote:]You'd think they'd learn from previous efforts

You would hope so

Flash2k11 wrote:The cynic in me suggests it has a lot to do with more ad breaks between the sessions and more sponsors for each segment of qualifying. 'THE FAST 8 SESSION, BROUGHT TO YOU BY HEINEKEN' etc. Already we have sponsors on the little infographics on the side of the screen for apex speeds etc.

Seems like a slippery slope.

I think the cynic in you had better not get noticed by Liberty Media's marketing department or he'll have a career and they'll find even more ways to shoehorn in more advertising.

Like Brawn has said, there is nothing wrong with qualifying, fans agree, Liberty Media agrees, teams agree... if it was just Q for the sake of Q they wouldn't even think about changing it.

However, they want to mix up the grid and are unhappy with situations like last race where P7-P10 had absolutely no chance against P11-P20 strategy-wise and finished behind a fair bunch of them because of that. I'm willing to see how it pans out. If it doesn't work, they can just switch it back.

Alienturnedhuman wrote:

Flash2k11 wrote:The cynic in me suggests it has a lot to do with more ad breaks between the sessions and more sponsors for each segment of qualifying. 'THE FAST 8 SESSION, BROUGHT TO YOU BY HEINEKEN' etc. Already we have sponsors on the little infographics on the side of the screen for apex speeds etc.

Seems like a slippery slope.

I think the cynic in you had better not get noticed by Liberty Media's marketing department or he'll have a career and they'll find even more ways to shoehorn in more advertising.

Well, I could do with a few quid

The current qualifying system is among the very best in any form of motorsport and possibly the best in the history of F1.
The proposed change to have 4 sessions wouldn't change or add anything outside of more wear and tear on the top guys' equipment, which I suspect is the strategy
behind this proposed new format .

Therefore, no need to even trial this new proposed format.

I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

After reports of a Saturday sprint race to determine the grid for Sunday's race then for me I'm relieved that they have hardly changed anything, I see the cynicism in being able to throw in more adverts but you could also argue that they think the present qualifying is so good that they want to extend it.

Another thing I'm glad to see is that they are not changing the points system were there was a rumour for points for the top 15 finishes, so as an overview hardly any change so I can live with that.

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

The present F1 qualifying system is so good that it's been copied by other series in one shape or another, be it Indycars, MotoGP, WSBikes and DTM.

It strikes me as a pointless change. This current format works very well for what it is, and changing to 4 parts would improve nothing.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

The present F1 qualifying system is so good that it's been copied by other series in one shape or another, be it Indycars, MotoGP, WSBikes and DTM.

I'm not a fan.

mikeyg123 wrote:I'm not a fan.

Which system do you like better?

And/or are you against the basic idea of arranging cars in order of speed to start the GP?

Sigh. Stop trying to fix things that aren't already broken.

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I'm not a fan.

Which system do you like better?

And/or are you against the basic idea of arranging cars in order of speed to start the GP?

My favourite was single lap quali. I'm aware I'm an outlier.

I wouldn't mind something radical like a reverse grid sprint race or something instead of qualifying.

The only thing I would change is the stupid tyre rules. Give everyone two sets of non-marked quali types for Q1, Q2 & Q3. Then come race day let the driver fit whatever compound tyre they want at the start - hard, soft, supersoft, whatever - hell if you're Toro Rosso fit Full Wets!
This way we would potentially have loads of mix strategies & maybe more entertaining races.

I too am of the opinion that the 'top 10 starting on their tyre from Q2' rule has run its course. As quite vividly demonstrated in Singapore, starting P9/10 is an inherent disadvantage due that tyre rule on a lot of circuits (P7-10 got shafted in Singapore). I think if the front guys could choose tyres you might see a bit more diversity in strategy at the front too, especially from Red Bull.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I'm not a fan.

Which system do you like better?

And/or are you against the basic idea of arranging cars in order of speed to start the GP?

My favourite was single lap quali. I'm aware I'm an outlier.

I wouldn't mind something radical like a reverse grid sprint race or something instead of qualifying.

That's just terrible, are you sure you're not moonlighting as Bernie?

mikeyg123 wrote:My favourite was single lap quali. I'm aware I'm an outlier.

Single lap qualifying was a great spectacle in its own way, but it was terribly unfair in any sort of mixed conditions. That's why I can't support it as a system, even if I did enjoy watching the onboard of each car go out and the building tension of seeing where they would slot in.

Flash2k11 wrote:I too am of the opinion that the 'top 10 starting on their tyre from Q2' rule has run its course. As quite vividly demonstrated in Singapore, starting P9/10 is an inherent disadvantage due that tyre rule on a lot of circuits (P7-10 got shafted in Singapore). I think if the front guys could choose tyres you might see a bit more diversity in strategy at the front too, especially from Red Bull.

Pirelli have said that they got the tyres wrong for Singapore, the hypers were too soft to be used as race tyres.

Three qualifying sessions is already bordering on too many. It does a decent job at thinning the field so the fast guys can run on a less congested track but getting to Q3 is more than a bit tedious.

Would be tempted to eliminate the first qualifying session and then select only the fastest 10 cars for Q2. You start the race on the tires you put in your fastest lap with regardless of session.

That said, I can live with three sessions and the current setup. We don't need 4 sessions.

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Sutton wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Single lap was good, although as Exediron alluded to, there were situations where it created a huge anticlimax at the end of the session.

*If* it had to change, I wouldn't mind some sort of combination of the single lap and what we have now. Still three sessions, with eight cars eliminated in Q1 and seven further cars eliminated in Q2. Q3 is then two sets of single (flying) laps for each of the five drivers, with the guy who finished P5 in Q2 going 1st (and 6th), P4 in Q2 going 2nd (and 7th) etc., and P1 in Q2 going 5th (and 10th). Give them free sets of the quickest compound so they can push as hard as they want.

The only thing I would change about qualifying is the rule about starting on the tires you qualify on. This rule needlessly punishes drivers who qualify on the 5th row because the guys right behind them just have a massive tire advantage. There is no point to forcing drivers to start the race on the tires they qualify on. IMO all drivers should be able to start on whatever tire they want to and all tires used in Q3 should be provided to the drivers who get in and not taken from their allotment for the weekend. It amazes me how F1 tries every gimmick in the book to try to get the top teams to mix up their strategies except for...giving them free choice of strategy!

Sutton wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Single lap qualifying were if it rains after 10 mins then pole position is set and the next 50 mins is farcical?

pokerman wrote:

Sutton wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Single lap qualifying were if it rains after 10 mins then pole position is set and the next 50 mins is farcical?

Yes, that's the one.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Sutton wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Single lap qualifying were if it rains after 10 mins then pole position is set and the next 50 mins is farcical?

Yes, that's the one.

I'm not sure why I put the question mark there?

Anyway like I say it's open to be farcical, why do things have to be like this to be viewed as being more exciting?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Sutton wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Single lap qualifying were if it rains after 10 mins then pole position is set and the next 50 mins is farcical?

Yes, that's the one.

I'm not sure why I put the question mark there?

Anyway like I say it's open to be farcical, why do things have to be like this to be viewed as being more exciting?

It's not the farcical bit that makes it more exciting. That being said tell me quali in Belgium 04 or Oz 05 wasn't exciting.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Sutton wrote: I liked the single lap quali.

Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats more to do with the current state of the sport than anything else, because on paper, the current way is the best way.

Single lap qualifying were if it rains after 10 mins then pole position is set and the next 50 mins is farcical?

Yes, that's the one.

I'm not sure why I put the question mark there?

Anyway like I say it's open to be farcical, why do things have to be like this to be viewed as being more exciting?

It's not the farcical bit that makes it more exciting. That being said tell me quali in Belgium 04 or Oz 05 wasn't exciting.

You must have a good memory no way I can remember back that far, can you only pick 2 whilst we have had none these past 2 years?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I actually hate the current format and find it dreadfully dull. It worked from 2006-13 when either the cars were close enough that anyone could go out at anytime or varied fuel loads meant the same but since then it's just been a waiting game as the same old names get dropped in Q1 and 2.

I'm pretty much alone in this but I loved single lap quali.

The present F1 qualifying system is so good that it's been copied by other series in one shape or another, be it Indycars, MotoGP, WSBikes and DTM.

Um... F1 adopted the 3-segment qualification/elimination program (with some modifications) in 2006, first pioneered by Indycar a couple years before.

As a practical matter, wouldn't additional Q segments require more tires? I thought the goal was to decrease expenses. It ain't broke, so don't fix it.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:
Agree the current version is dull as hell cos we all know the same cars drop out, the same cars get into Q3 and of those in the top 10 there will only be 4 drivers able to get pole in 16/21 races. Thats
Single lap qualifying were if it rains after 10 mins then pole position is set and the next 50 mins is farcical?

Yes, that's the one.

I'm not sure why I put the question mark there?

Anyway like I say it's open to be farcical, why do things have to be like this to be viewed as being more exciting?

It's not the farcical bit that makes it more exciting. That being said tell me quali in Belgium 04 or Oz 05 wasn't exciting.

You must have a good memory no way I can remember back that far, can you only pick 2 whilst we have had none these past 2 years?

I'm confused, none of what?

Well, Liberty should first get more teams on the grid. Then, after that succeeded, it may make sense to introduce a 4-part qualifying.

I don't really see the point in qualifying. I mean qualifying is something you do when threre are more candidates than places on the grid. At present we are 6 cars short for a full grid, which means everybody qualifies.

I remember the reason for bringing in "better" qualifying schemes; avoiding long periods during which nobody went out on track. Even as it is, drivers complain about traffic, whether there is too much of it (impeding) or too little of it (failing to get a tow). Removing 2 cars from the final Q period isn't going to change all that much.

Advertising is indeed probably the main reason for seeking to fix an invented problem.

Fiki wrote:I don't really see the point in qualifying. I mean qualifying is something you do when threre are more candidates than places on the grid. At present we are 6 cars short for a full grid, which means everybody qualifies.

I remember the reason for bringing in "better" qualifying schemes; avoiding long periods during which nobody went out on track. Even as it is, drivers complain about traffic, whether there is too much of it (impeding) or too little of it (failing to get a tow). Removing 2 cars from the final Q period isn't going to change all that much.

Advertising is indeed probably the main reason for seeking to fix an invented problem.

Then how should it be determined who starts where if we do away with quali?