Jump to content


Photo

Aus GP : Saturday Qualifying discussion thread


  • Please log in to reply
365 replies to this topic

#151 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:24

Originally posted by StefanV
I read Kimi was on his in lap. Still he posted green sector 1 & 2. He also had to waste extra fuel on the out lap when he almost got to a stand still letting Robert Kubica through. My guess is that he simply ran out of fuel.


Dude, he can control that from the car, he has settings for so and the team would have told him that.

And the team know the rules. If he parks on the road, game over in qualifying.

Only a stupid would think for a while that he ran out of fuel.

Advertisement

#152 Pingguest

Pingguest
  • Member

  • 390 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:26

I don't like the new 2008 qualifying format, as the parc fermé regulations are tightened again. Drivers are not allowed to refuell after qualifying. That makes the sport even more complex. Maybe too complex for some non-die hard fans. If the FIA really want those post-qualifying parc fermé regulations, why not going back to the more transparant one lap qualifying.

#153 pRy

pRy
  • Member

  • 10,718 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:27

Originally posted by StefanV
I read Kimi was on his in lap. Still he posted green sector 1 & 2. He also had to waste extra fuel on the out lap when he almost got to a stand still letting Robert Kubica through. My guess is that he simply ran out of fuel.


Driving slower uses more fuel? Best tell the teams that, they've been driving slowly to save fuel for years now.

Kimi had a fuel supply problem on Friday. They even changed the entire fuel section of the car with FIA permission. That fault returned.

#154 DoubleWDC

DoubleWDC
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:28

Originally posted by rodlamas

But the most interesting thing is the Ferrari performance. They were expected to DOMINATE. They weren't expected to fight for pole with Mclaren and then get a 1-3, for instance. They were expected to get a 1-2 0.5 ahead of Hamilton.


By whom? That is simply untrue. Virtually every "expert" commentary I have read has said McLaren has the edge on quali pace at least and there has been not much contention against it by anyone.

#155 hsvone

hsvone
  • Member

  • 1,079 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:29

I just wish like a lot of other fellow F1 fans that Q3 was low fuel like the other two qualifying rounds. :(

#156 AFCA

AFCA
  • Member

  • 6,661 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:32

Originally posted by hsvone
I just wish like a lot of other fellow F1 fans that Q3 was low fuel like the other two qualifying rounds. :(


There's no need to push for the 2/3 topteams in Q2 to get to Q3 because the distance with the rest is too big. That makes it less exciting indeed.

#157 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:32

Originally posted by hsvone
I just wish like a lot of other fellow F1 fans that Q3 was low fuel like the other two qualifying rounds. :(


Me too.

Simply ask the teams to settle their starting fuels prior to Q1.

If you get to Q3, you can't change it, if you don't, you can.

All 3 sessions run on low fuel.

#158 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:33

Originally posted by AFCA


There's no need to push for the 2/3 topteams in Q2 to get to Q3 because the distance with the rest is too big. That makes it less exciting.


Indeed. Actually, it's better for Ferrari not to reveal their max pace to Mclaren (and vice-versa) in order to try an strategy manouver.

#159 Al.

Al.
  • Member

  • 1,301 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:33

Originally posted by ex Rhodie racer
Farrari seem to have lost the plot. I wonder how much of that you can put down to the Todt factor? Still, it´s only the first race of the season, but it doesn´t auger well.
Vettel is a revelation once again. :up:
Hamilton, so smoooooth, but I think the Mac is working really well and is in tune with the tyres. Some criticism of Kovi but I think he showed well first time in the car. He will only get stronger. Maybe he suffers from opening night nerves. :lol:
Here´s to a good, safe race. :wave:


Well I always thought that the Melbourne track was kind of like the Canadian GP circuit or Monaco or Hungary. Not much grip and not the real aero test of some of the faster Tilke tracks. Last year McLaren were much quicker at all those except Australia which as the season panned out became the exception. Looking back I put that down to them (Ferrari) hitting the ground running with the Bridgestone knowledge. Assuming the staus quo at the front (Ferrari McLaren and BMW) is similar it shouldn't be a surprise to see McLaren a match for Ferrari in Australia. BMW is the surprise.

If McLaren and BMW are a match in quali & race pace at Malaysia, then based on the pre season that would be a surprise.

Advertisement

#160 Durant

Durant
  • Member

  • 694 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:38

Originally posted by rodlamas


Me too.

Simply ask the teams to settle their starting fuels prior to Q1.

If you get to Q3, you can't change it, if you don't, you can.

All 3 sessions run on low fuel.


That defeats the purpose of declaring fuel. They want q3 to be in race trim to 'mix up' the grid although it never really does of course. Not where it matters.

#161 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:39

Originally posted by pRy


Driving slower uses more fuel? Best tell the teams that, they've been driving slowly to save fuel for years now.

Kimi had a fuel supply problem on Friday. They even changed the entire fuel section of the car with FIA permission. That fault returned.

As I said, he posted green sectors until the car stopped. That is not slower, it is faster. Regarding the Kubica issue - yes, if you have to slow down on a straight and then accelerate again it uses more fuel than if you did not have to brake. Furthermore I can imagine that since he had to do it on his out lap he had t compensate by being extra aggressive the rest of the lap to get the tyres up to temperature.

#162 hsvone

hsvone
  • Member

  • 1,079 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:40

Also the winner of the first race quite often goes on to become the WC. And guess who won the Aussie GP last year? :cool:

So Kubica to get his first win would be interesting.

#163 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:41

Originally posted by Al.


Well I always thought that the Melbourne track was kind of like the Canadian GP circuit or Monaco or Hungary. Not much grip and not the real aero test of some of the faster Tilke tracks. Last year McLaren were much quicker at all those except Australia which as the season panned out became the exception. Looking back I put that down to them (Ferrari) hitting the ground running with the Bridgestone knowledge. Assuming the staus quo at the front (Ferrari McLaren and BMW) is similar it shouldn't be a surprise to see McLaren a match for Ferrari in Australia. BMW is the surprise.

If McLaren and BMW are a match in quali & race pace at Malaysia, then based on the pre season that would be a surprise.


3 days ago lots of people were saying Melbourne would have favoured Ferrari... How come that it has changed?

Hamilton said Mclaren is now better (compared with ferrari) than one year ago.

I'm just delighted with the result, not only because I'm a Mclaren fan, but because all the hype around Kimi and the F2008 being the perfect-unbeatable combo has come to null after those first two days. On Friday, Hamilton and Massa were clearly faster than Kimi on the long runs (actually Kova was also a tad faster, but less than LH and FM).

Ok, LH and HK can have a bad race, reliability problems etc.

But all the quotes from the italian press have turned to be at least "untruths".

- Where are the solutions for teh reliability problems the F2007 suffered from?
- Where are the solutions that would lead to a much better qualifying pace?

#164 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:42

Originally posted by StefanV

As I said, he posted green sectors until the car stopped. That is not slower, it is faster. Regarding the Kubica issue - yes, if you have to slow down on a straight and then accelerate again it uses more fuel than if you did not have to brake. Furthermore I can imagine that since he had to do it on his out lap he had t compensate by being extra aggressive the rest of the lap to get the tyres up to temperature.


So 26.1 was the max pace for Raikkonen on the harder tyre?

Well, if so, he's in for an awful season...

#165 Al.

Al.
  • Member

  • 1,301 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:46

Originally posted by Pingguest
I don't like the new 2008 qualifying format, as the parc fermé regulations are tightened again. Drivers are not allowed to refuell after qualifying. That makes the sport even more complex. Maybe too complex for some non-die hard fans. If the FIA really want those post-qualifying parc fermé regulations, why not going back to the more transparant one lap qualifying.


I don't see how it makes it more complex.
Last year the fuel burn laps had to be within a certain % (110%?) of the pole lap (or your own fastest lap - can't remember) and there was another % number for in laps and out laps (120%?), in order to get a fuel credit. So drivers could actually start the race with more fuel than they started Q3 (kind of makes a mockery of 'race fuel'.). They needed to run the fuel down to have a lighter car to set a time, so they all had to do as many laps as they could.

Now you just put fuel in before Q3 and that's it for Q3 and the start of the race. Drivers will (in the 10 minutes) have 2 goes at setting a time and that's the grid.
It's sort of like the last 10-15 minutes of the old free for all qualifying system but with race fuel.

#166 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:51

Originally posted by Al.


I don't see how it makes it more complex.
Last year the fuel burn laps had to be within a certain % (110%?) of the pole lap (or your own fastest lap - can't remember) and there was another % number for in laps and out laps (120%?), in order to get a fuel credit. So drivers could actually start the race with more fuel than they started Q3 (kind of makes a mockery of 'race fuel'.). They needed to run the fuel down to have a lighter car to set a time, so they all had to do as many laps as they could.

Now you just put fuel in before Q3 and that's it for Q3 and the start of the race. Drivers will (in the 10 minutes) have 2 goes at setting a time and that's the grid.
It's sort of like the last 10-15 minutes of the old free for all qualifying system but with race fuel.

I think we will see a lot of confusing and frustrating situations. For instance:

Driver A makes a decent lap and get pole
Driver B beats driver A with a tenth
Driver A thinks "ok, I think I could beat that time, but I think I rather start second and pit three laps later."

I think a second run will prove very costly for the teams so we have basically the one lap qualifying back.

#167 Music Man

Music Man
  • Member

  • 84 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:52

Originally posted by hsvone
I just wish like a lot of other fellow F1 fans that Q3 was low fuel like the other two qualifying rounds. :(

I don't know... I believe there would be no point in such qualifying format. What would be the difference between Q2 and Q3 then? It's true that top teams don't have to push to the maximum in Q2, but they also can't drive with one hand out of the cockpit while listening loud music on the team radio ;) As we saw today, other teams from midpack are much more competitive than last year, so top team driver could easily find himself in P11 with only 10 seconds to go, if he takes it too easy.

I think that this year's changes to qualifying format have made it interesting again. We get rid of slowest drivers in Q1, see more than less true pace of teams in Q2 and in Q3 the strategies kick in. Is it better to put less fuel in tank, put the car on pole, run away at the beginning of the race, but have to stop quite early and lose much advantage from lighter car, or play it more conservative by putting more fuel in, qualify a bit lower but then be able to run significantly longer?

I don't know for the rest of you, but I like it :)

#168 Galko877

Galko877
  • Member

  • 4,150 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:52

Originally posted by rodlamas


3 days ago lots of people were saying Melbourne would have favoured Ferrari... How come that it has changed?

Hamilton said Mclaren is now better (compared with ferrari) than one year ago.

I'm just delighted with the result, not only because I'm a Mclaren fan, but because all the hype around Kimi and the F2008 being the perfect-unbeatable combo has come to null after those first two days. On Friday, Hamilton and Massa were clearly faster than Kimi on the long runs (actually Kova was also a tad faster, but less than LH and FM).

Ok, LH and HK can have a bad race, reliability problems etc.

But all the quotes from the italian press have turned to be at least "untruths".

- Where are the solutions for teh reliability problems the F2007 suffered from?
- Where are the solutions that would lead to a much better qualifying pace?



What about the hype on Hamilton and McLaren last year that they have the title in the bag? ;)

Guys, the season is LOOOOOOOOOOONG and we haven't even seen race pace yet. It's too early to write off anybody.

#169 Formulaonefan

Formulaonefan
  • Member

  • 389 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:53

Maybe if there was less Ferrari philosophy in the McLaren Ferrari would be faster then them. However Ferrari is not fast enough we will see tommorow.

#170 DrBob

DrBob
  • Member

  • 32 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:55

I thought the second half of Hamilton's pole lap didn't just look smooth, it looked as though he was driving well within his/the car's limits. I wonder whether he would have been throwing it around more if KR/HK/FM had been up front with competitive times at that point.

Looking good for an entertaining race, although I suspect that if LH gets a clean start he shouldn't have too much trouble building a cushion over RK at the front. For me the fun will be watching the midfield battles sort themselves out, as well as watching the fast guys starting lower than expected (KR, MW I'm looking at you. NP, not so much) fight their way up.

#171 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:05

Originally posted by Formulaonefan
Maybe if there was less Ferrari philosophy in the McLaren Ferrari would be faster then them. However Ferrari is not fast enough we will see tommorow.


Dude, you never give up, don't you?

#172 Domination

Domination
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:06

Originally posted by Formulaonefan
Maybe if there was less Ferrari philosophy in the McLaren Ferrari would be faster then them. However Ferrari is not fast enough we will see tommorow.


There is more McLaren philosophy in the Ferrari than the other way around! Some Toyota philosophy as well.

#173 Man of the race

Man of the race
  • Member

  • 1,265 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:08

Originally posted by Galko877
What about the hype on Hamilton and McLaren last year that they have the title in the bag? ;) Guys, the season is LOOOOOOOOOOONG and we haven't even seen race pace yet. It's too early to write off anybody.


I agree. Tomorrow's race is LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG. ;)

#174 Enkei

Enkei
  • Member

  • 5,745 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:09

Originally posted by Formulaonefan
Maybe if there was less Ferrari philosophy in the McLaren Ferrari would be faster then them. However Ferrari is not fast enough we will see tommorow.


So McLaren copied Ferrari ideas better than Ferrari could have thought of their selves? :lol:

#175 Formulaonefan

Formulaonefan
  • Member

  • 389 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:09

I hope Ferrari is struggling on setup. Massa and Hamilton have similar fuel loads, maybe one or other has one lap more that is what I analysed anyway.

Difference Between Massa q3 and q2 is 1:27:178-1:25:691=1.487

Hamiltons difference between q3 and q2 is 1:26:714-1:25:187=1.527

However Massa did not get a second run .

#176 Al.

Al.
  • Member

  • 1,301 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:09

Originally posted by rodlamas


3 days ago lots of people were saying Melbourne would have favoured Ferrari... How come that it has changed?

Hamilton said Mclaren is now better (compared with ferrari) than one year ago.

I'm just delighted with the result, not only because I'm a Mclaren fan, but because all the hype around Kimi and the F2008 being the perfect-unbeatable combo has come to null after those first two days. On Friday, Hamilton and Massa were clearly faster than Kimi on the long runs (actually Kova was also a tad faster, but less than LH and FM).

Ok, LH and HK can have a bad race, reliability problems etc.

But all the quotes from the italian press have turned to be at least "untruths".

- Where are the solutions for teh reliability problems the F2007 suffered from?
- Where are the solutions that would lead to a much better qualifying pace?


I guess the predictions were based on Melbourne last year, which ignored the fact that it was McLarens first race on Bridgestones, and that they were much stronger at all the other similar tracks last year.

Reliability is a funny thing, assuming Kimi didn't run out of fuel, then he appears to have been affected by the same thing as he had in free practice. It may be something that hasn't been diagnosed properly (hence changing the entire fuel system) that reoccurred, or something that they haven't got a proper fix for in Australia. It is also possible that it is a new problem that they haven't seen in testing.

As to the comments to the press, they know that reliability and qualifying pace and mechanical grip were the weaknesses last year, so they are hardly going to say 'Nah we've not bothered working on any of that as it didn't ultimately matter last year.

What they will say is we have worked on solutions for reliability & qualifying pace. If the press choose to write that those problems are fixed and the solutions are good enough before they see the cars run at the first race, then that's up to them.

This is the some press core that wrote off Honda, had BMW struggling, and in most polls I've seen, had Toyota pegged as a 7th fastest team behind Ferrari McLaren (BMW Williams Red Bull Renault) & Toro Rosso.

#177 Formulaonefan

Formulaonefan
  • Member

  • 389 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:11

Enkei point is Ferrari is slow looking at results, point is McLaren would be even slower. Longer wheelbase, brake development, tyre gas, rear dampers now, what next.

#178 Formulaonefan

Formulaonefan
  • Member

  • 389 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:13

Not to mention the floor last year.

#179 Domination

Domination
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:14

Originally posted by Formulaonefan
Enkei point is Ferrari is slow looking at results, point is McLaren would be even slower. Longer wheelbase, brake development, tyre gas, rear dampers now, what next.


1) McLaren had to abandon those brake systems due to their similarity to Ferraris
2)McLarens are the only one that are not allowed to use the tyre gas this season.
3) You could as well say Ferrari copied McLarens Short wheelbase.
4) rear dampers? what about them. like I said, Ferrari copied the whole zero keel. Without the zero keel, Ferrari would be nowhere.

edit: Ferrari being inspired by Toyotas nose. what next?

Advertisement

#180 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:15

Originally posted by StefanV

I think we will see a lot of confusing and frustrating situations. For instance:

Driver A makes a decent lap and get pole
Driver B beats driver A with a tenth
Driver A thinks "ok, I think I could beat that time, but I think I rather start second and pit three laps later."

I think a second run will prove very costly for the teams so we have basically the one lap qualifying back.


I actually don't see a problem with that. I think this is better than the format last year, because (as I suggested when this rule first came out) the grids are going to be pretty mixed up by some interesting fuel strategies. The very fact that the teams are forced into reacting within boundaries (ie it removes some control of the situation from the teams - as in the example you've given) is, in my opinion, a positive for producing interesting races .

To be short. In terms of setting up good racing; Optimisation - bad, compromise - good.

#181 Al.

Al.
  • Member

  • 1,301 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:17

Originally posted by StefanV

I think we will see a lot of confusing and frustrating situations. For instance:

Driver A makes a decent lap and get pole
Driver B beats driver A with a tenth
Driver A thinks "ok, I think I could beat that time, but I think I rather start second and pit three laps later."

I think a second run will prove very costly for the teams so we have basically the one lap qualifying back.


Well I think most had 2 goes today, and the fuel put in at the start of Q3 will have reflected that.
Massa obviusly aborted his second attempt and saved a lap, but obviously he went and attempted it.
If you are only a 10th away that can be found be the driver, and if you are on pole by a tenth you will go again in case someone beats it.

We've had race fuel in qualifying since (was it 2003?) and as far as I can remember most drivers have had 2 stabs at a quick time.

#182 Claudius

Claudius
  • Member

  • 2,275 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:17

[push the wrong button mode]

It was clear to see Kimi was messing with the steering wheel, so he surely pushed the wrong button.
It's strange the experts in this board who spotted another driver do that in Brazil 07, are yet not commenting this one...

[ /push the wrong button mode]

;)

#183 Formulaonefan

Formulaonefan
  • Member

  • 389 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:18

Ferrari have more a twin keel due to the carbon fibre under the nose. No Ferrari where first to experiment with wheelbase, mate, overall from 2006 an increase. You believe McLaren abandoned development , you are funny don't trust McLaren a bit especially after Dennis lied last yea on number occasions.

#184 Enkei

Enkei
  • Member

  • 5,745 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:19

Originally posted by Formulaonefan
Enkei point is Ferrari is slow looking at results, point is McLaren would be even slower. Longer wheelbase, brake development, tyre gas, rear dampers now, what next.


The McLaren of this year was carefully examined by the FIA and dubious developments were abandoned.
Please put the whole spygate saga to a rest, I think it's safe to say this year's car is fast on McLaren's own merit.

And remember, no points have been given yet. Anything can still happen tomorrow and the rest of the season.

#185 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,304 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:20

I think the new qualifying system is a bit rubbish personally.

The speed differential is scary, the way that fuel isn't being given back means there is less reason for teams to go out and have a second shot and in some cases it is better for a car to not even participate in the session at all since it will save engine wear and fuel to just stay in the garage if you're only fighting for p7-p10.

Stupid changes aimed at reducing tedium has only added to it.

#186 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 7,886 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:22

Originally posted by Formulaonefan
Ferrari have more a twin keel due to the carbon fibre under the nose. No Ferrari where first to experiment with wheelbase, mate, overall from 2006 an increase. You believe McLaren abandoned development , you are funny don't trust McLaren a bit especially after Dennis lied last yea on number occasions.


You're just a troll that is only trying to find reasons for Ferrari being both slow and unreliable. And your arguments are as good as 5 year old child would produce.

And about the spygate I will talk about it again when someone explains why Mclaren was charged like they were last year and Spyker wasn't even it they confessed that they were in possession of STR documents.

#187 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:23

Originally posted by hsvone
Also the winner of the first race quite often goes on to become the WC. And guess who won the Aussie GP last year? :cool:

So Kubica to get his first win would be interesting.


I still don't get this whole Kubica thing. I think that, despite the hype around him, Heidfeld was generally the better driver in terms of races last year. I rather feel that the trend will continue this year. This is qualifying, and we have no idea of the fuel levels that these cars are starting with. We have yet to see how the drivers are going to cope with looking after their tyres over a race now that TC (and engine braking) is gone.

I'm actually very optimistic (having watched qualifying, and seen how those cars move around again :love: - how many times over the years have we been told by 'experts' that this won't happen by getting rid of TC :rolleyes: ) that, with certain drivers' tyres degrading at a greater rate than others, with the mixed fuel strategies that are going to be found, in the top ten particularly, we are going to be treated to some great racing. Drivers making mistakes under pressure, passing.....maybe I'm getting carried away, but.....those cars are a real handful :D

Watch out for Raikkonen....

#188 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:28

Originally posted by kar
I think the new qualifying system is a bit rubbish personally.

The speed differential is scary, the way that fuel isn't being given back means there is less reason for teams to go out and have a second shot and in some cases it is better for a car to not even participate in the session at all since it will save engine wear and fuel to just stay in the garage if you're only fighting for p7-p10.

Stupid changes aimed at reducing tedium has only added to it.


Yeah, the whole aim of qualifying now is to get the best tactical position, or rather the best tactical compromise, for the race - having to react to situations outside of your complete control without being able to optimise everything. I mean, how awful, imagine the race being the most important aspect of the weekend..... :rolleyes:

#189 jk

jk
  • Member

  • 1,750 posts
  • Joined: November 00

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:32

Drivers will not react to other drivers times. Everybody has a schedule that gives them 2 flying laps, with the last lap in the dying seconds. That is the way everyone will go, and the plan will not change.
You will not see drivers set a fast lap in the first minute of Q3 and then waiting to see what times other guys are doing. I am certain all pole laps (in normal circumstances) will be set in the last minute of qualifying. No time to react to anything. Just stick to your schedule and get the best lap as possible.

#190 Formulaonefan

Formulaonefan
  • Member

  • 389 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:34

hold your temper mate and don't call me a troll. I'm not trying to find reasons for Ferrari being slow. Massa was slower like in Canada last

#191 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:37

Originally posted by jk
I am certain all pole laps (in normal circumstances) will be set in the last minute of qualifying. No time to react to anything. Just stick to your schedule and get the best lap as possible.

I am also quite certain of that. However, the question is rather - how often will a driver win from pole? Surely, you can add fuel for the extra run in the general strategy, but that does not change the fact that a decent first attempt is probably better than getting pole in the second. We will see how it pans out, but I can imagine this was the reason why they had the "add fuel" and the resulting "fuel burning" thing last season.
I agree with angst that it makes for interesting races, but the qualifying itself is no longer worth spending time watching.

#192 rolf123

rolf123
  • Member

  • 2,331 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:40

Q3 is still ridiculous and a game of "guess how much fuel in the tank". Ban refuelling, I still say.

btw I think everyone is reading too much into practice+qual. Still haven't seen the race and we all know this is a "bogey" GP anyway.

Mark my words, Massa will win WDC this year!

#193 karlth

karlth
  • Member

  • 16,216 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:40

Originally posted by kar
I think the new qualifying system is a bit rubbish personally.

The speed differential is scary, the way that fuel isn't being given back means there is less reason for teams to go out and have a second shot and in some cases it is better for a car to not even participate in the session at all since it will save engine wear and fuel to just stay in the garage if you're only fighting for p7-p10.


I'm pretty sure that most drivers would be willing to sacrifice 2 laps of fuel for two grid places on the grid at the start of the races.

Didn't all the teams go for a second lap?

#194 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:44

Originally posted by kar
I think the new qualifying system is a bit rubbish personally.

The speed differential is scary, the way that fuel isn't being given back means there is less reason for teams to go out and have a second shot and in some cases it is better for a car to not even participate in the session at all since it will save engine wear and fuel to just stay in the garage if you're only fighting for p7-p10.

Stupid changes aimed at reducing tedium has only added to it.



:up:
I've seen enough f1 cars wizzing around albert park to picture what happened from the results, I will not wake up in the morning for crappy sessions like this,

Last year many watched this session because it was the first session without the great Schumi, since they brought in quali changes to mess up the grid in 2003 to slow Schumi down, we don't even have Schumi to combat the rules with his slick majestic cornering technique and application in the war against the crappy rules lol :lol:



The session could of done with some Schumacher laps. :smoking:


:up: :up: :up:

#195 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,304 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:44

Originally posted by karlth


I'm pretty sure that most drivers would be willing to sacrifice 2 laps of fuel for two grid places on the grid at the start of the races.

Didn't all the teams go for a second lap?


I don't think Vettel did.

#196 jokuvaan

jokuvaan
  • Member

  • 4,057 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:45

Only problem I see in new quali format is fuel saving mode after first try while returning to pits, there are now some really slow moving cars on the track.

#197 jez33

jez33
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:46

Originally posted by kar
I think the new qualifying system is a bit rubbish personally.

The speed differential is scary, the way that fuel isn't being given back means there is less reason for teams to go out and have a second shot and in some cases it is better for a car to not even participate in the session at all since it will save engine wear and fuel to just stay in the garage if you're only fighting for p7-p10.

Stupid changes aimed at reducing tedium has only added to it.


Not sure why you think anything is wrong with it.

Martin Brundle made a comment about a single driver not going out putting a time down, namely Vettel, but he had gearbox problems.

Every other team went out and put down at least a couple of runs.

This year's Q3 format is a million times better than last year's format, which was just stupid.

#198 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,630 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:53

Originally posted by angst
I still don't get this whole Kubica thing. I think that, despite the hype around him, Heidfeld was generally the better driver in terms of races last year.....

That says as much about Heidfeld as it does Kubica. He's never quite captured the popular imagination, but Nick has shown plenty of times he has the ability, without any hooha, of getting the job done in the race. IMO drivers hit their stride in the third season, particularly when it comes to consistency week-in week-out, so I wouldn't damn Kubica just yet.

#199 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 15 March 2008 - 12:57

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist

That says as much about Heidfeld as it does Kubica. He's never quite captured the popular imagination, but Nick has shown plenty of times he has the ability, without any hooha, of getting the job done in the race. IMO drivers hit their stride in the third season, particularly when it comes to consistency week-in week-out.

I think also that Nick has proved that he will never develop into a "great" driver. He is good, he is solid. He is a couple of tenths slower than Kubica when they both have a good lap. I think it is more likely that Kubica will be more solid than it is that Nick will be faster.

Advertisement

#200 emburmak

emburmak
  • Member

  • 2,350 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 15 March 2008 - 13:02

Originally posted by rodlamas


3 days ago lots of people were saying Melbourne would have favoured Ferrari... How come that it has changed?

Hamilton said Mclaren is now better (compared with ferrari) than one year ago.

I'm just delighted with the result, not only because I'm a Mclaren fan, but because all the hype around Kimi and the F2008 being the perfect-unbeatable combo has come to null after those first two days. On Friday, Hamilton and Massa were clearly faster than Kimi on the long runs (actually Kova was also a tad faster, but less than LH and FM).

Ok, LH and HK can have a bad race, reliability problems etc.

But all the quotes from the italian press have turned to be at least "untruths".

- Where are the solutions for teh reliability problems the F2007 suffered from?
- Where are the solutions that would lead to a much better qualifying pace?


:up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:

It is nice to see reality finally blowing away alot of presumed conceptions away. :lol: :lol: