Should Sprint Race Winners be credited with Pole Statistic?

https://www.motorspo...-wrong/6630846/

Vettel has spoken out against the decision to award the sprint race winners with the pole statistic, saying that it should be a new category instead as it's a very different challenge.  Have to say I agree with him.  Thoughts?

It's a different challenge, but winning the sprint race gets you pole position for the main race and that's an objective fact. But as I said in another thread, you can keep all sorts of statistics, including winning the non-race qualifying session (or however it's best defined), and this could also count "poles" that were taken away due to post-qualifying penalties such as Schumacher at Monaco in 2012.

But we've also had in the past qualifying on race fuel and tyres which has arguably "messed it up" as well. Also, drivers are all in different cars!

But ultimately it's the statistics websites you need to be petitioning.

I think it should have its own column. A qualifying is supposed to be a time trial event, free of any racing. With the possibilities of poor start, collisions, surprising VSCs, penalties and tyre problems, the winner of the sprint "qualifying" hardly represents who's the fastest driver or team around the circuit. Even FP1 is a better candidate for pole statistics and the Sprint Race.

Pole position = starts first in the race (I will ignore the very small number of cases where this is not true due to penalties or other circumstances)

Whoever wins the sprint race, starts first in the race, therefore gets the pole position. Sure, it's a different kind of qualifying, but qualifying none then less. There already were different kinds of qualifying in the past and who knows what the future will bring. Maybe the pole position will be decided by coin toss. And the pole position statistic should cover any kind of qualifying

It's essentially a heat race to decide pole and get some interim points.  So if you're going all strict about it, then it's a pole position only. 

If we go back to the very first Grand Prix, the race was held over 2 days, and the cars started the second day in order of times from the first.  So if you finished the first day 10 minutes behind the leader, you started the second day 10 minutes after he started. 

In a sense this is the same thing, only without the time gap.  We do not credit Szisz with 2 wins, only the one. 

Also, the 1959 German Grand Prix, held over 2 heats and decided by aggregate times.  Tony Brooks crossed the line first at the end of both heats.  We credit him with one Grand Prix victory for the weekend, not 1 or 2 non-title wins.

Pole Position is whoever starts on Pole (which is not always the quickest man in quali, there have been occasions before), that F1 introduced a shitty system that doesnt reward the quickest driver/team is none of the statistics' issue, because once you are using asteriks for it you may as well stop having statistics ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I like this format as there is some Interest for all three days ( fri-sat-sun ).  Take postion on friday, defend your position on Saturday for Sunday's race.

If a driver messed up or has mechanical issue in quali, They'll have a chance to improve in the sprint race.

Also, the 1959 German Grand Prix, held over 2 heats and decided by aggregate times. Tony Brooks crossed the line first at the end of both heats. We credit him with one Grand Prix victory for the weekend, not 1 or 2 non-title wins.

Pole Position is whoever starts on Pole

He who starts on Pole is the Pole Sitter, some may not like it, but that's is who the statistics should be counted, as they always have.

It's pretty clear what "pole position" means, there's no reason to count things differently because of a new format just because some people misunderstood what it has always meant.

If you want a statistics that reflects who the fastest driver over one lap is, then make a new one. Qualifying session winner or something like that. It's not like we've never had instances that the fastest driver in Q didn't start from pole before.

Edited by noikeee, 16 July 2021 - 16:15.

How is this even up for debate?

Pole position is the guy who starts the Grand Prix from 1st position on the grid. Therefore the statistic goes to whoever does that, no matter what method was used to decide who it is.

How is this even up for debate?

 

Pole position is the guy who starts the Grand Prix from 1st position on the grid. Therefore the statistic goes to whoever does that, no matter what method was used to decide who it is.

Exactly.

Pole Position is whoever starts the Grand Prix in first, as we have learnt over the years by all the drivers who has lost a pole due to a grid penalty/disqualification later, as others have said all that's changed is the way they get there.

Edit: Hi Crofty.... you clearly just read this 

Edited by SilverArrow31, 16 July 2021 - 17:02.

Of course, that still leaves the question...should the driver who starts from pole in the quali race also be credited with a pole?

Of course, that still leaves the question...should the driver who starts from pole in the quali race also be credited with a pole?

We always had a name for it after the Friday session. We called it Provisional Pole.

Anyone voting no in this poll needs to take a look at themselves, frankly 

How is this even up for debate?

Pole position is the guy who starts the Grand Prix from 1st position on the grid.

Anyone voting no in this poll needs to take a look at themselves, frankly

As much as I am against this change to the way the grid is decided, the person who wins the sprint race and (barring penalties/DQ) will start the race from the front is the pole sitter. There is no other reasonable definition. 

I detest this new format but I cannot see that it's even up for debate. Barring penalties or a DQ, the winner of the sprint race will line up at the front of the grid for the grand prix and is the pole sitter. 

F1 over complicating things again.

Pole is given to the fastest man over 1 lap, simple.

Why could they not have waited until 2022 with the new cars before trying this crap.

Pole is the guy who starts from position 1 on the starting grid. Equally simple and actually correct.

Pole is the guy who starts from position 1 on the starting grid. Equally simple and actually correct.

Why did Leclerc get Monaco 2021 and his Grand Prix result is credited as DNS?

I'm overanalysing for sure, but still curious how they decided that. 

https://www.motorspo...-wrong/6630846/
 
Vettel has spoken out against the decision to award the sprint race winners with the pole statistic, saying that it should be a new category instead as it's a very different challenge.  Have to say I agree with him.  Thoughts?

Yes.
Should F1 have a qualifying race? No.

This. P1 tomorrow is pole, it’s just a crappy way of doing it.

This is a pointless discussion. The pole position is credited to the one who stands first in the grid, independdently of the way how it is defined. So, of course yes, and this is a useless thread.

Edited by Victor, 16 July 2021 - 20:22.

IMO the pole sitter of today (friday) should have been awarded the pole as it is a normal qualy session. Leave this experiment out of the statistics

Why did Leclerc get Monaco 2021 and his Grand Prix result is credited as DNS?

 

I'm overanalysing for sure, but still curious how they decided that. 

He was the driver awarded pole position. He was a DNS, but it doesn’t take it away. Pole position was not awarded to the next driver. And the cars that made the start started from position 2 back.

This has always been the case. Once the he grid is set the first driver is on pole position. There are a number of cases where the pole position driver didn't get to start.

If we really must have this abomination, pole should always remain as the best qualifying time. This then has no unwanted effect on pole statistics.

You mean pole should become the best qualifying time, which it technically never was.

Why did Leclerc get Monaco 2021 and his Grand Prix result is credited as DNS?
 
I'm overanalysing for sure, but still curious how they decided that. 

Of course, that still leaves the question...should the driver who starts from pole in the quali race also be credited with a pole?

Maybe they should flip a coin?

Not always strictly true. Leclerc was credited with pole position but didn't start the grand prix this year at Monaco.

Because they did not shuffle the grid, Leclerc won Pole and did not take his spot on the grid due tech issues.

It doesn't really make much difference, after a 100km sprint race the winner is 9 out of 10 times going to be the guy who was quickest in qualifying.

 

The real problem, if it's true that the essence of this statistic supposedly is which driver was quickest over 1 hotlap, is that we've kept track of the wrong statistic to begin with.

 

 

That's not really true, as we've had pole for lap on race fuel (so not equal conditions) and also pole for sum of 2 laps for a while.

That's not really true, as we've had pole for lap on race fuel (so not equal conditions) and also pole for sum of 2 laps for a while.

It was still something fairly similar - arbitrarily handicapped hotlap, and sum of 2 hotlaps, is sort of similar to a low fuel hotlap. Now it'll be, winner of a race.

That's not really true, as we've had pole for lap on race fuel (so not equal conditions)...

Of course it was still equal conditions in the context. Adding more or less fuel is just a setup choice like a myriad of other things. It's no different than for example chosing a setup that heats the tyres quickly for a qualifying lap but destroys them quicker in the race.

... and also pole for sum of 2 laps for a while.

When was that? Genuine question.

F1 has for quite a while made a thing of the 'Pole Lap', which is now on certain race weekends going to be something a bit different.  So there will be no celebrating a hot lap.  And the quali race will have a winner, but won't officially in terms of race win statistics.  But as pointed out we did have race fuel qualifying with various fuel levels for a number of seasons and also the single lap quali which was highly dependant on track conditions, so the statistic was already slightly muddied.

You mean pole should become the best qualifying time, which it technically never was.

Edited by milestone 11, 16 July 2021 - 21:59.

It's essentially a heat race to decide pole and get some interim points. So if you're going all strict about it, then it's a pole position only.

If we go back to the very first Grand Prix, the race was held over 2 days, and the cars started the second day in order of times from the first. So if you finished the first day 10 minutes behind the leader, you started the second day 10 minutes after he started.

In a sense this is the same thing, only without the time gap. We do not credit Szisz with 2 wins, only the one.

Also, the 1959 German Grand Prix, held over 2 heats and decided by aggregate times. Tony Brooks crossed the line first at the end of both heats. We credit him with one Grand Prix victory for the weekend, not 1 or 2 non-title wins.

couldn't really vote as there's no option that reflects reality. when you qualify, you don't win pole, you just qualify first. equally, you can't win pole from a sprint race, either, just win the race. pole position is a position on the track where you start a race from. this has traditionally been what signifies pole position and has always been what's put down in the books. it has not changed, it's still the same as it has been since forever.

Yes.
Should F1 have a qualifying race? No.

it's not a qualifying race, it a race. that it just so happens also determines how cars line on the day after doesn't alter that fact. qualifying implies that it's testing a drivers quality, just like the current qualifying does. it was like this a hundred years ago and it still is due to the 107% rule, which is only active during qualification, not in the sprint race.

the sprint race is a race like every other race, you line up on a grid, you perform a standing start, race other drivers for position, win or lose the race, get on a podium (although this one is token only) and get points for finishing position. its a race. this is exactly how gp2 worked and no-one called the sprint race a 'qualifying race' eventhough it also dictated the grid positions in the feature race the day after.