Get rid of grid penalties

Now, I am of the opinion that F1 stewards are interfering way too much by giving out way too many penalties. But, some of them are warranted, so that is really not the issue I want to bring up in this thread. Instead, it is the unfairness of the grid penalties.

With the grid-place penalties, you cannot be demoted to anywhere further back than the 22nd place (or the pitlane, in essence the same thing). So, if you recieve a 10-place penalty and you qualify 15th, your penalty is in reality just a 7-place penalty, since you get to start 22nd, but had you qualified 7th, you would have gotten the entire 10-place penalty and started 17th. Fair? I think not. Therefore, I propose that the grid-place penalties are removed entirely and replaced with stop-go penalties at the beginning of the race, to be taken within the first three (racing) laps. In my opinion that would be more fair. What do you think?

Now, I am of the opinion that F1 stewards are interfering way too much by giving out way too many penalties. But, some of them are warranted, so that is really not the issue I want to bring up in this thread. Instead, it is the unfairness of the grid penalties.

 

With the grid-place penalties, you cannot be demoted to anywhere further back than the 22nd place (or the pitlane, in essence the same thing). So, if you recieve a 10-place penalty and you qualify 15th, your penalty is in reality just a 7-place penalty, since you get to start 22nd, but had you qualified 7th, you would have gotten the entire 10-place penalty and started 17th. Fair? I think not. Therefore, I propose that the grid-place penalties are removed entirely and replaced with stop-go penalties at the beginning of the race, to be taken within the first three (racing) laps. In my opinion that would be more fair. What do you think?

No, that isn't the case as the remaining places carry over...

I'd disagree as it's far more of a penalty in my view. You might start 17th rather than 7th and so lose some time passing slower cars etc, but surely you'd lose far more time with a stop go penalty in the first 3 racing laps and drop say 20+ seconds behind the guy in last place (as well as then having to pass the slower cars if you catch up to them), which in all honesty, if all the penalty is for is for a gearbox change (for example) does seem extraordinarily harsh.

No, that isn't the case as the remaining places carry over...

Albeit only for 1 race I think, after that, it doesn't carry over (so Bianchi qualfying P21 10 races in a row but with a 10 place grid penalty would only drop to 22nd twice, rather than 10 times for example)

The carry-over system doesn't address the inherent unfairness that if you qualify near the back, you don't take the full penalty, because they only carry over for one race, so there's still plenty of scope for a significant proportion of the penalty effectively to go unserved.

Personally I don't see why, if a car is given an x-place penalty and, owing to where they qualified, it isn't possible to move them back x places, they can't be forced to line up in last place on the grid and held in position by a marshall standing in front of their car with a yellow flag, and held in position for a short time after the race has started. So if you qualify 20th in a field of 22 and are given a 10-place penalty, you move back two places to 22nd and you are then held on your grid slot after the lights have gone out for five seconds for each place that you could not be moved back, so in this case 40 seconds. Or maybe, for safety, in case the car fails to move when it is released, cars that need to be held at the start should be required to line up in the pit lane and wait there to be released, so you don't end up with the awkward situation of a car stopped on the start/finish straight and not much time to go before the leaders arrive on the scene.

The carry-over system doesn't address the inherent unfairness that if you qualify near the back, you don't take the full penalty, because they only carry over for one race, so there's still plenty of scope for a significant proportion of the penalty effectively to go unserved.

 

Personally I don't see why, if a car is given an x-place penalty and, owing to where they qualified, it isn't possible to move them back x places, they can't be forced to line up in last place on the grid and held in position by a marshall standing in front of their car with a yellow flag, and held in position for a short time after the race has started. So if you qualify 20th in a field of 22 and are given a 10-place penalty, you move back two places to 22nd and you are then held on your grid slot after the lights have gone out for five seconds for each place that you could not be moved back, so in this case 40 seconds. Or maybe, for safety, in case the car fails to move when it is released, cars that need to be held at the start should be required to line up in the pit lane and wait there to be released, so you don't end up with the awkward situation of a car stopped on the start/finish straight and not much time to go before the leaders arrive on the scene.

The bit in bold is FAR too harsh in my view. Basically unless you're a mega quick car or unless an SC comes out, you may as well not even bother carrying on if you're going to be 40 seconds (in your example) behind the guy in 21st before you even start moving (on top of the time taken to get up to speed and on top of the time lost purely because you're already behind the guy in 21st on the grid anyway). I know why you want penalties that can't be carried over for more than one race to actually mean something, but it's extraordinarily harsh to be honest.

The stewards handed out a couple of drive-through in lieu of grid penalties last year, before they came up with carrying on penalties for this year. I don't mind either way to be honest.

The carry-over system doesn't address the inherent unfairness that if you qualify near the back, you don't take the full penalty, because they only carry over for one race, so there's still plenty of scope for a significant proportion of the penalty effectively to go unserved.

 

Personally I don't see why, if a car is given an x-place penalty and, owing to where they qualified, it isn't possible to move them back x places, they can't be forced to line up in last place on the grid and held in position by a marshall standing in front of their car with a yellow flag, and held in position for a short time after the race has started. So if you qualify 20th in a field of 22 and are given a 10-place penalty, you move back two places to 22nd and you are then held on your grid slot after the lights have gone out for five seconds for each place that you could not be moved back, so in this case 40 seconds. Or maybe, for safety, in case the car fails to move when it is released, cars that need to be held at the start should be required to line up in the pit lane and wait there to be released, so you don't end up with the awkward situation of a car stopped on the start/finish straight and not much time to go before the leaders arrive on the scene.

not a bad idea but 1 sec per place, rather then 5, I'd say

Now, I am of the opinion that F1 stewards are interfering way too much by giving out way too many penalties. But, some of them are warranted, so that is really not the issue I want to bring up in this thread. Instead, it is the unfairness of the grid penalties.

 

With the grid-place penalties, you cannot be demoted to anywhere further back than the 22nd place (or the pitlane, in essence the same thing). So, if you recieve a 10-place penalty and you qualify 15th, your penalty is in reality just a 7-place penalty, since you get to start 22nd, but had you qualified 7th, you would have gotten the entire 10-place penalty and started 17th. Fair? I think not. Therefore, I propose that the grid-place penalties are removed entirely and replaced with stop-go penalties at the beginning of the race, to be taken within the first three (racing) laps. In my opinion that would be more fair. What do you think?

Under the current system: Qualify 1st + 10 place grid penalty = start 11th

Under your system: Qualify 1st + stop go penalty at the start of the race = all the way down to last place after the penalty.

Sure, that's way more fair for everyone... 

Edited by johnmhinds, 25 July 2014 - 17:58.

So basically punish them even harder...

No thanks. 

I really dislike grid penalties, they just mix it up.

The bit in bold is FAR too harsh in my view. Basically unless you're a mega quick car or unless an SC comes out, you may as well not even bother carrying on if you're going to be 40 seconds (in your example) behind the guy in 21st before you even start moving (on top of the time taken to get up to speed and on top of the time lost purely because you're already behind the guy in 21st on the grid anyway). I know why you want penalties that can't be carried over for more than one race to actually mean something, but it's extraordinarily harsh to be honest.

It doesn't have to be 5 seconds per place. It could be more, or less.

I'd have thought somebody who qualifies, say, 10th would expect to lose at least 50s on his race time if he has a 10-place penalty and has to start 20th, because when you lose places on the grid you lose track position, and you pay for that throughout the race. Whereas if you're last anyway and lose 40s, you will make up quite a reasonable chunk of that time on lap 1 because you'll have the track to yourself, and you will continue to run in clear air until and unless you catch up to the pack. So while I agree a 10-place penalty for a Caterham might put you in a very difficult position in terms of being able to beat your teammate or the Marussias, that's very much in keeping with the impact of a 10-pace penalty for, say, a car that usually qualifies 10th or 11th, which would also heavily compromise that car's chances of beating his immediate rivals. I don't think you would see those cars giving up because of a 30-odd second gap after one lap, when there's every chance of a SC.

Get rid of penalties almost every driver will get one throughout the season so doesn't really matter if no one gets one

Your logic is sound except that it rests on the false assumption that, if it was the same for everybody and either everybody or nobody was going to be penalised, the manufacturers and teams would nevertheless continue to endeavour to try to make their gearboxes and ICEs and MGUs last the required number of races. They wouldn't. We'd be back to qualifying engines. The rule is there for a reason and there's no point having a rule without an associated penalty.

I really dislike grid penalties, they just mix it up.

See above.
 

Under the current system: Qualify 1st + 10 place grid penalty = start 11th

 

Under your system: Qualify 1st + stop go penalty at the start of the race = all the way down to last place after the penalty.

 

Sure, that's way more fair for everyone... 

It is more fair in the sense that everyone loses ~30 seconds for a 10 second stop-go penalty, regardless of where you qualify. As you (and others) correctly point out, that is a very harsh penalty. And I apologise for not making this point before, but of course you shouldn't get a 10 second stop-go penalty for something as trivial as an engine or gearbox change. Such harsh penalties should only be given for very serious offenses. An engine change could be punished by for example disallowing the fastest time set in each qualifying session the driver participated in. But imho, the engine limitations should be removed completely, but that is another discussion. But what I wanted to address was the unfairness of the grid penalties, and I wasn't aware of the carry-over rule, which to an extent seems to address the problem.

But imho, the engine limitations should be removed completely, but that is another discussion. But what I wanted to address was the unfairness of the grid penalties, and I wasn't aware of the carry-over rule, which to an extent seems to address the problem.

I don't think the stop & go or drive through penalties are useful because they don't have enough variability or consistency to be used as time penalties.

You can't give really short time (5-10 second) penalties via a drive through due to it taking 15-20+ seconds to travel down the pitlane, and not all pitlanes are the same length or have the same speed limits anyway.

If these penalties were to be fair they would have to all be changed to time penalties that are added after the race.

Not that the FIA seems to give two shits about the sport being fair these days.....

Edited by johnmhinds, 25 July 2014 - 22:21.

I don't think the stop & go or drive through penalties are useful because they don't have enough variability or consistency to be used as time penalties.
 
You can't give really short time (5-10 second) penalties via a drive through due to it taking 15-20+ seconds to travel down the pitlane, and not all pitlanes are the same length or have the same speed limits anyway.
 
If these penalties were to be fair they would have to all be changed to time penalties that are added after the race.
 
Not that the FIA seems to give two shits about the sport being fair these days.....