Reverse grids?

Many racing series are practising ruined grids today. An usual way to ruin it is to reverse the top-8 finishers for the second race. Others ruin it by introducing a fuel messed qualifying.

I despise this trend of ruining startin grids. The pure idea of racing is to have the fastest drivers running in front. If someone doesnt agree with that running order, he can always drive faster and overtake. The idea of creating systems which put faster drivers in catch up position is like a pile of shhh. Fastest are the ones who should be having edge over the rest. Having the cars/drivers in the speed order is gold.

I much rather see such a race with 0 overtaking moves, than a reverse grid where 50% of drivers manage to overtake to recover to their truthful position. Racing isnt supposed to be entertainment, it's supposed to be racing...

I think it would be a great idea IF overtaking was a bit easier in F1. If they can crack the overtaking issue...then I think it would be great to watch some class drivers fighting their way up through the field.

What's the point of qualifying if the fastest time doesn't get you anything?

I don't like reverse grids at all.

F1 is complex enough that the relative speed changes throughout the race due to tiny variables, they just need to sort out the aero issues making it too hard for a car to be behind another enough to overtake.

It's good for a series like the BTCC where they have three short sprint races during the day, but for a GP where they race just the once it's not worth doing. They also wouldn't be able to regulate it - which is why the BTCC went for a random number of grid reversals, rather than a specific number. It's not a bad idea per se, it just doesn't fit with F1.

Oh, and try not to make a totally biased poll next time. Just because you dislike the idea doesn't mean the poll choices should be totally based on your point of view.

Reverse grid? We'd see then some of the fastest cars on this planet being driven at the slowest possible pace.

We saw the silliness a few years back, when MS and RB binned their cars, others drove very slow during their first qualifying lap. Why? Because the weather report indicated showers late in the single lap qualifying. So they made sure they could get out early for the second, the real important lap. Funnily enough, the rain never arrived in the end, and those pulling their usual qualification lap got rewarded by being able to run their lap late when the track conditions were best.

Reverse grids, ballast weight and mandatory pit stops are nonsense.

Reversing grids is so imbecil I'm afraid Max might eventually implement it in F1.

Reverse grids are for Hot Rod and banger racing. Go to Wimbledon, Arena Essex,Henesford,The High Edge Buxton of a Saturday evening if you like that sort of thing.

NO!!!

No. No fakey-fake racing please. Measures intended to increase parity, punish success or 'spice up the action' quickly turn me against any series above feeder level.

would be nice to try it...

Would work if they gave points for all qualifying positions and more points for race finishes.

If you want a show, reversing the grid is really the only way to get a show (save racing in equal machinery). As for the value of qualifying - simple, award points for qualifying and then reverse the grid. The point difference between each position would also need to be high enough to reward overtaking and prevent sandbagging.

think some stock car series use reverse championship order

Reverse grids sound a bit too much like rewarding the teams who do a less-than-superb job. It may be fun in your local Sunday afternoon go-kart race but not in a global championship like Formula One.

Originally posted by Tigershark
Reverse grids sound a bit too much like rewarding the teams who do a less-than-superb job. It may be fun in your local Sunday afternoon go-kart race but not in a global championship like Formula One.

Huh?
Did you read the part about awarding points?

Originally posted by Bouncing Pink Ball
No. No fakey-fake racing please. Measures intended to increase parity, punish success or 'spice up the action' quickly turn me against any series above feeder level.

Exactly! No gimmicks for me. If a race series can't can't survive without gimmicks it deserves to pass into the history books.

I don't understand the gibberish you put as the options.

But I hate reverse grids, ballast systems and any handicap system of that kind.

I can't vote in your poll because I can't tell which bits you're being sarcastic about.

In all seriousness, what they should do is qualify on minimum fuel like they used to. If you qualify on pole you should get the privelege of loading up with as much fuel as you please, and holding up everyone behind you who foolishly opted for low fuel. That would make for more exciting racing than reverse grids or any other sort of gimmick.

If you really want to spice up the show,

Have 1/2 the grid race clockwise and the other 1/2 anti-clockwise.






this ought to keep james allen's head spinning long enough to shut him up

Originally posted by Aubwi
I can't vote in your poll because I can't tell which bits you're being sarcastic about.

Just vote the fourth option, racing should be pure.

What would you think about a football match, where the inferior team would have more players (reverse)? Or a football match, where you could have more players in second half at the cost of first half etc... (fuel strategy). Dont say these are great ideas

Originally posted by micra_k10
Just vote the fourth option, racing should be pure.

What would you think about a football match, where the inferior team would have more players (reverse)? Or a football match, where you could have more players in second half at the cost of first half etc... (fuel strategy). Dont say these are great ideas

Do you mean to say that the current F1 qualifying rules (fastest starts first) is similar to a football match where the superior team has more players?

Go back to proper racing as it was before Milo Minderbinder & Herr Flick mucked up ie grid places determined in Timed Practice and no planned pitstops in the race.

Reversing the grid isn't "fake" racing.

If the argument against it is that "well, the slower cars wouldn't have a chance otherwise" then what you're really saying is what happened in qualifying was "the race". "The faster car should start at the front" - well, why?

You can race an elephant against a rabbit. If the rabbit is obviously faster, is it really a "race" if they start at the same point - or worse yet, with giving the rabbit a HEAD START? A more entertaining event would be to try to balance the situation to make the outcome MORE unpredictable, not less - and the bottom line is *entertainmen*.

I'd go further and say position them on the track reversed to their time offset, that'd be even more interesting.

Offset their start position based on the last race. If the second slowest car was 1 minute down on the winner, position the winner that far back and let him try to make up as much as he can by allowing qualifying to offset it. "Untraditional", but logical IMO. You set up a race where all the cars in theory have the chance of being at the finish at the same time, which would make for the best race IMO.

Giving a headstart makes no sense IMO.

/ in the PGA the guy that could drive the farthest would be allowed to tee up closer to the hole
// in NHRA you'd have the faster ET car given an early light
/// in baseball the more home runs you had you'd be allowed to have the pitcher move farther back
//// in football you'd have the team with the better record being able to choose to return without a toss
///// in basketball you'd move the free throw line closer to the hoop for the guy that had a better average
///// - in car racing you give the FASTER CARS A HEADSTART? WTF?

the problem you intentionally miss is that in all the other sports you can give an equal start to everybody. in F1 and motorsport you can't, since there is not enough room

Originally posted by Rubens Hakkamacher
A more entertaining event would be to try to balance the situation to make the outcome MORE unpredictable, not less - and the bottom line is *entertainmen*.

balancing is fake
you just prove the point
balancing means taking from the good ones just because they do their job better

Originally posted by MikeTekRacing
the problem you intentionally miss is that in all the other sports you can give an equal start to everybody. in F1 and motorsport you can't, since there is not enough room

Since each team has to follow the same rules I'd say they start out equal.

I vote for a lottery system, hosted by James Allen playing the part of Dale Winton and Louise Goodman as the skimpy dressed girl who lets the balls drop. Martin Brundle on commentary. The FIA can have a competitive tender for building the lottery ball machines which will be won by Magnetti Marelli

"Well James that's a surprise, for the 15th race in a row we've had a Ferrari on pole."

Originally posted by JacnGille


Since each team has to follow the same rules I'd say they start out equal.

I agree this, my point was that they can't find a system which would allow ALL the 20 cars to start the race with the same chances...thus we have qualy, you have the same chances until then

Originally posted by MikeTekRacing
the problem you intentionally miss is that in all the other sports you can give an equal start to everybody.

How do other sports get an equal start?

Originally posted by JacnGille


How do other sports get an equal start?

Use your imagination now, this shouldn´t be so difficult to understand. Just picture inside your head three different competition starts: 100 meters running, 200 meters swimming and F1 race. Hmm, what´s the difference might be?

Got it?

Unless each team has clones of each and every runner or swimmer they are not equal.

Originally posted by Rubens Hakkamacher


Giving a headstart makes no sense IMO.

/ in the PGA the guy that could drive the farthest would be allowed to tee up closer to the hole
// in NHRA you'd have the faster ET car given an early light
/// in baseball the more home runs you had you'd be allowed to have the pitcher move farther back
//// in football you'd have the team with the better record being able to choose to return without a toss
///// in basketball you'd move the free throw line closer to the hoop for the guy that had a better average
///// - in car racing you give the FASTER CARS A HEADSTART? WTF?

Nobody is getting headstart. Since there is no track wide enough to line all cars side by side, then there has to be some way to put them in starting order. What might be better way to do that than drive "first lap of race" separately on saturday and continue the race on sunday by positions you were after "first lap"? That is only fair way to form the grid, as it rewards those who do good work unlike all kind of reversed/lottery grids that rewards losers or are just based on luck... those kind of solutions have nothing to do with sport - that´s just entartaiment for "USA -type" of fans who couldn´t care less about sport but want to see entertaining spectacle.

As for your list of other sports, first of all, from all of those sports you listed, motorsports is the only one that has this problem that all competitors can´t have equal starting position simply because there is no room for everybody in front row.

Yet there is multiply sports where one can have a small advantage due to nature of sport and gues what? every single sport favours those who are doing well over those who are behind. For example, I´m just watching Wimbledon Grand Slam tournament now Youzhny vs Nadal (cheering for Nadal here ), there is no starting grid in tennis, but there is a seeding system. You think it is not an unfair advantage for Federer and Nadal that they don´t have to face each other until the final (if they get there)? Young up and coming talents need to face best players from early rounds on, while world top players don´t need to face other top players untill last rounds, fair? I guess if you guys watch tennis, you are hoping Federer and Nadal would meet in first round in every grand slam so one of them would drop early and lesser players had easier to get into final.

The aim of qualify is to define the quickest driver isn't it? So messingup the order is not makingthing any more logical, thus less exciting.

In order to pursuit eventful race and hard racing I rather propose to abolish qualify and one more race on Saturday. One can make another race on Saturday in random order, award points a la Mot Gp to the winner and start another race on Sunday based on the race result of Saturday.

Points System:
1st = 25 points
2nd = 20 points
3rd = 16 points
4th = 13 points
5th = 11 points
6th = 10 points
7th = 9 points
8th = 8 points
9th = 7 points
10th = 6 points
11th = 5 points
12th = 4 point
13th = 3 points
14th = 2 points
15th = 1 point

the only plus I see from this is that the good /poor overtakers will come to light.

Originally posted by JacnGille
Unless each team has clones of each and every runner or swimmer they are not equal.

Ok, I´ll give you a tip: runners and swimmers can start all competitors side by side because there is enough room on track to do so. Can you now guess what is the difference in any motorsports starting formation vs runners/swimmers? I won´t help you more than this, you need to think very hard to figure it out, but I´m sure that you can do it.

Originally posted by yr


Ok, I´ll give you a tip: runners and swimmers can start all competitors side by side because there is enough room on track to do so. Can you now guess what is the difference in any motorsports starting formation vs runners/swimmers? I won´t help you more than this, you need to think very hard to figure it out, but I´m sure that you can do it.

Oh, I see. I never knew that the only reason that a Force India car hasn't won a race is because they don't get to start on the front row. :

Originally posted by paranoik0
I don't understand the gibberish you put as the options.

you and me both..

There are always competitors who are better than other competitors in every sport, we are arguing about how it is impossible to give an absolutely equal opportunity to every competitor in motorsport, when compared to other sports where it is possible to do so.

other sports like swimming or running are completely different because their performance does not rely on equipment..

EDIT: a sport which comes to mind that resembles F1 racing is horse races..

Originally posted by One
The aim of qualify is to define the quickest driver isn't it? So messingup the order is not makingthing any more logical, thus less exciting.

In order to pursuit eventful race and hard racing I rather propose to abolish qualify and one more race on Saturday. One can make another race on Saturday in random order, award points a la Mot Gp to the winner and start another race on Sunday based on the race result of Saturday.

Points System:
1st = 25 points
2nd = 20 points
3rd = 16 points
4th = 13 points
5th = 11 points
6th = 10 points
7th = 9 points
8th = 8 points
9th = 7 points
10th = 6 points
11th = 5 points
12th = 4 point
13th = 3 points
14th = 2 points
15th = 1 point

And then on monday pull drivers numbers out of the hat and give 40 points for driver whose number comes out first, then 2 points for second number, then 38 for 3rd number, then 4 points for 4th number and so on... we are in for a very exciting championship, anybody can win it.

Originally posted by paranoik0
There are always competitors who are better than other competitors in every sport, we are arguing about how it is impossible to give an absolutely equal opportunity to every competitor in motorsport, when compared to other sports where it is possible to do so.

It is equal as it can get now. Qualifying = first lap of race. Fastest will continue race on sunday at first place and slowest is still behind everyone when race continues on sunday. Anything else is artificial attempt to have more entarteining spectacle.

Originally posted by BMW_F1
other sports like swimming or running are completely different because their performance does not rely on equipment..

EDIT: a sport which comes to mind that resembles F1 racing is horse races..

Maybe you should then stick in series like GP2 or Indy cars where cars are more equal then? Or are you suggesting that Formula 1 should turn a serie where everybody has same car?

Originally posted by yr


It is equal as it can get now. Qualifying = first lap of race. Fastest will continue race on sunday at first place and slowest is still behind everyone when race continues on sunday. Anything else is artificial attempt to have more entarteining spectacle.

Yes, I'm with you on this.

Originally posted by yr


Maybe you should then stick in series like GP2 or Indy cars where cars are more equal then? Or are you suggesting that Formula 1 should turn a serie where everybody has same car?

No, actually I wasn't suggesting anything. I think making a car faster then others is the primary focus of Formula one instead of determining who is the best/fastest driver.
Reverse grid would work if the primary focus was driver talent/speed/racecraft.

Originally posted by paranoik0
There are always competitors who are better than other competitors in every sport, we are arguing about how it is impossible to give an absolutely equal opportunity to every competitor in motorsport, when compared to other sports where it is possible to do so.

Motorsports DOES give everyone an equal opportunity...everyone follows the same rules! Please explain how it is possible to give every competitor in other sports an equal opportunity.

Originally posted by JacnGille


Motorsports DOES give everyone an equal opportunity...everyone follows the same rules! Please explain how it is possible to give every competitor in other sports an equal opportunity.

I don't really know what are we all arguing about, since we're all against reverse grids. But anyway: in football one team gets an headstart in one half, the other team gets an headstart in the other half. It's equal opportunity. In some forms of non-motorsport racing (athletics, swimming, etc etc) you can line up people side-by-side, giving them an equal opportunity or close to it. But in motorsport, you need to stack cars ahead of each other because there's no more room side-by-side, and starting ahead is a big advantage, therefore in the actual race you need to give a big advantage to some competitor.

Therefore, the fairest and most sporting way is to give that advantage to the best competitor, through qualifying, which is a contest of speed like the race but with some slightly different requirements. And that's it.

im not fussed either way. fastest first is just so happens tobe the way its done in most racing series, ofcourse most racing series are more competative and have more form varibles plus easier overtaking...

Originally posted by paranoik0

...But anyway: in football one team gets an headstart in one half, the other team gets an headstart in the other half. It's equal opportunity. In some forms of non-motorsport racing (athletics, swimming, etc etc) you can line up people side-by-side, giving them an equal opportunity or close to it. But in motorsport, you need to stack cars ahead of each other because there's no more room side-by-side, and starting ahead is a big advantage, therefore in the actual race you need to give a big advantage to some competitor.

Starting alongside a car that is 2 seconds a lap faster will not give the slower car any better chance of winning...unless the track is only one car width wide and the slower car is geared only to out accelerate every other car.

And, several other keep sayin that other sports provide equal opportunities. That is false, unless, as I posted previously, that the teams are composed of clones.