70 replies to this topic

[JL14]

With the general consensus being that the current qualifying system is (one of the) best we've had and could have, there always remains talk and debates about 1-lap qualifying.

And the one thing I don't like about the current system is a qualifying lap generally is not that critical: drivers most often either have a banker lap to fall back on (with a slightly worse end result but not the worst) or they can have another go. And that is the thing 1-lap qualifying offers: they have to make that one lap count, showing who can perform under that ultimate qualifying pressure to nail that one lap. However, 1-lap qualifying has the negative element of changing and different track and/or weather conditions for each driver.

 

For like a year or so I have the following idea in my head, which is simply a single (rule) change to the current qualifying format, and I really would like to see F1 give it a try:

The format stays exactly as it is now, but - like at the Indy500 - when a driver goes for a qualifying lap he loses the lap(time) he'd already set.

 

You think you can do better? Show it. But there's no fall back on your previous attempt anymore. You have to deliver the lap when you go for it. 

So like I say: putting the pressure back on the qualifying laps.

 

Of course it requires some rules and regulations to establish when a driver is considered to have started a Q-lap, to avoid the arguing that it was just a fast in-lap, second build-up lap, or whatever. Which can be kept quite simple, like for example if the first 3 seconds of the lap have been driven at full throttle, or the first couple of mini-sectors are faster than x seconds. Or they could go for an engine setting that has to be used on in-/out-/warm-up laps which limits the max. engine power and if that setting is not used they are considered to be on a qualifying lap. Or like with the pitlane speed limited there's a setting with a limiter for in-/out-/warm-up laps limiting the maximum speed to for example something like 30km/h less than wat is normally achieved on a Q-lap (more than fast enough to prep your Q-lap, to not be a driving road block, but a big enough difference to lose valuable laptime for a Q-lap.)

Anyway, that is something that can be solved and regulated.

Same as that when you have to abort your lap due to a yellow or red flag or impeding, your previous lap will be reinstated .....or not, as you decided to take the risk.

 

[F1Frog]

I like it.

[SenorSjon]

The second 'summer' break is doing strange things to people.

[PlatenGlass]

The second 'summer' break is doing strange things to people.

 

I know. Whatever next - reverse grids?

[Anderis]

I don't think there's an issue with "not enough pressure" in the current qualifying format. Tyre limitations mean that a driver usually only has only 2 proper chances per qualifying segment and track evolution often means the early lap is not good enough to put the car where it really belongs. You just have to look at how many times Perez has been knocked out in Q1/Q2 in the last two years in a top car to know it's not a walk in the park to put the car where it belongs in qualifying.

[southernstars]

As always every year, I've been amped up. If we want a bit of extra qualifying spice, keep Q1 and Q2 as normal, then turn Q3 into the Top Ten Shootout ala Bathurst. One lap, one set of tyres, the track to yourself, one golden opportunity to take pole.

[RPM40]

They could introduce a system that for example after a period of time during the qualifying session the slowest driver is eliminated and then the slowest driver continues to get eliminated.

 

That would put pressure on the drivers to put in good laps and i'm sure would be a huge success.

[SenorSjon]

Or you could keep Q1 and Q2 times and have a continuous pole battle.

[Muppetmad]

Qualifying doesn't need changing. The TV director just needs to learn to actually show us at least some of the pole lap rather than showing the entirety of the lap of the person who clearly isn't in contention.

[Clatter]

Qualifying doesn't need changing. The TV director just needs to learn to actually show us at least some of the pole lap rather than showing the entirety of the lap of the person who clearly isn't in contention.

It's the in/out laps they follow while there is someone putting in a fast lap that really irritates me.

[JimmyClark]

There's a risk though drivers won't think they can do any better and stay in.

Personally I'd have single lap qualifying for the sprint qualifying (as we are stuck with them), and our normal qualifying as it is for the race.

[southernstars]

There's a risk though drivers won't think they can do any better and stay in.

Personally I'd have single lap qualifying for the sprint qualifying (as we are stuck with them), and our normal qualifying as it is for the race.

 

Oooh, make the Sprint Shootout a real Shootout. I like it.

[tyker]

There's a risk though drivers won't think they can do any better and stay in.

Personally I'd have single lap qualifying for the sprint qualifying (as we are stuck with them), and our normal qualifying as it is for the race.

Yes it's something I've thought as well, it might mix things up a bit rather than go full on reverse grid, ideally it starts reverse order of the WDC standings but I guess from an entertainment angle they would want the faster drivers going last to build up the excitement so the faster drivers also get the best track conditions so less chance of anything actually getting shuffled around.

[absinthedude]

I don't see the point. Qualifying isn't something that has any issues. It's already working for all purposes - setting the grid and providing compelling television and trackside viewing. 

[tyker]

I don't see the point. Qualifying isn't something that has any issues. It's already working for all purposes - setting the grid and providing compelling television and trackside viewing. 

Yeah it's very much a case of if it aint broke why the need to fix it.

[noikeee]

So you want less cars on track instead of more?

Absolutely not, bad idea.

[Sterzo]

Sorry, JL14, another attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist. (Worthy of the FIA). Instead it would create a new source of dissatisfaction: pole goes to someone who doesn't have the fastest lap.

[Massa]

The second 'summer' break is doing strange things to people.

This. 😂

[pdac]

Just get the drivers to do their fastest laps without their cars. It would even make F1 more environmentally friendly.

[LolaB0860]

I actually agree. I have repeatedly asked for Indy-style qualifying procedures with actual risks, sort of like the one suggested here.

 

Of course, there are other more urgent things that need fixing than qualifying (such as destroying entry cartel created by FOM and teams etc), but I certainly wouldn't mind this. I have never been fan of the current system, I mean it's okayish I guess but sort of boring. Q1 and Q2 are mostly meaningless and then for Q3 the surprises aren't really there anymore. And then Sprint Qualifying is just exact copy of normal qualifying which is even lamer than the Sprints itself.

Edited by LolaB0860, 13 October 2024 - 17:04.

[MKSixer]

Sorry, JL14, another attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist. (Worthy of the FIA). Instead it would create a new source of dissatisfaction: pole goes to someone who doesn't have the fastest lap.

Don't be like that...

 

Make it a combination of the best lap of the driver, his aggregate time in a combined 100m-200m-400m sprint medley and total time in a US style, hotdog (50)  eating contest, as a nod to Liberty.  This would be a winner, for sure.     

Edited by MKSixer, 13 October 2024 - 17:13.

[pdac]

Isn't the purpose of qualifying to try to organise the cars into a speed-sorted order (because they cannot line up side-by-side at the start). That being the case, why propose changes that replace a system that tries hard to organise the cars correctly, but is susceptible to the odd element of luck, with something that designs in a far greater element of luck?

[Anderis]

Isn't the purpose of qualifying to try to organise the cars into a speed-sorted order (because they cannot line up side-by-side at the start). That being the case, why propose changes that replace a system that tries hard to organise the cars correctly, but is susceptible to the odd element of luck, with something that designs in a far greater element of luck?

Perhaps because the greater element of luck will contribute to more cars being out of order, leading to more interesting Sundays?

 

Nothing determines that organising the cars into a speed-sorted order as well as possible must be our primary concern. In an ideal world, the relative qualifying performances of the car-driver combos don't match exactly with their relative race performances because then we have more interesting weekends. There have been efforts taken in the past to introduce variables that actually were trying to disrupt qualifying the cars into a speed-sorted order, like qualifying with the race fuel loads for example.

[pdac]

Perhaps because the greater element of luck will contribute to more cars being out of order, leading to more interesting Sundays?

 

Nothing determines that organising the cars into a speed-sorted order as well as possible must be our primary concern. In an ideal world, the relative qualifying performances of the car-driver combos don't match exactly with their relative race performances because then we have more interesting weekends. There have been efforts taken in the past to introduce variables that actually were trying to disrupt qualifying the cars into a speed-sorted order, like qualifying with the race fuel loads for example.

 

So then people don't want sport, they want entertainment. Nothing wrong with that unless you call it sport.

[JL14]

Isn't the purpose of qualifying to try to organise the cars into a speed-sorted order (because they cannot line up side-by-side at the start). That being the case, why propose changes that replace a system that tries hard to organise the cars correctly, but is susceptible to the odd element of luck, with something that designs in a far greater element of luck?

 

What 'element of luck' are you talking about?

It's not 'luck' if you nail your lap, that's performing .

It's not 'unlucky' if you mess up your lap and end up without a representative qualifying time, that's just not performing when it matters.

 

I don't wanna see who can set the fastest lap within x number of attempts. I want to see which driver can put a time on the board when he needs to.

This is a way to get that without going to one-by-one single lap qualifying.

 

For the fear of drivers not running. They all know there's track evolution. And there's basically always a driver who didn't get his lap together. Will others run the risk of getting beaten by that driver that goes out again? Don't thinks so. Especially not if one more goes out, and then again one more... they can't run that risk but have to actually run the risk 

Edited by JL14, 13 October 2024 - 19:24.

[pdac]

What 'element of luck' are you talking about?

It's not 'luck' if you nail your lap, that's performing .

It's not 'unlucky' if you mess up your lap and end up without a representative qualifying time, that's just not performing when it matters.

 

I don't wanna see who can set the fastest lap within x number of attempts. I want to see which driver can put a time on the board when he needs to.

This is a way to get that without going to one-by-one single lap qualifying.

 

For the fear of drivers not running. They all know there's track evolution. And there's basically always a driver who didn't get his lap together. Will others run the risk of getting beaten by that driver that goes out again? Don't thinks so. Especially not if one more goes out, and then again one more... they can't run that risk but have to actually run the risk 

 

The current 'luck' elements are whether someone impedes your lap, whether a yellow or red flag is shown on you, whether so many cars come out at once that you cannot find the space you require, whether they skies decide to open up and rain falls before you've managed to get out and set you time and probably other factors that I can't think of right now. These are all unfortunate events that can occur with the current system. But I fail to see why people are suggesting systems that will introduce more chance into the proceedings.

[Afterburner]

I disagree that the qualifying format doesn’t need changing. It’s not that it’s broken, just that it’s been solved—skip to the last two minutes of every session and that’s almost always all you need to see.

The cynic in me says that’s the point—much easier to fit this into a highlight package—but I still think we’d be better off swapping Q3 to a single-lap session so that we can see the last attempt of each driver in full and the final result is (mostly) in doubt throughout the session rather than just until the last two minutes.

I feel like a broken record saying this, but I’d love it to become a two-day affair over Friday/Saturday, with a knockout session on Friday splitting the grid into groups and then those groups running single-lap sessions competing only amongst themselves to set the grid. Would reduce the number of practice sessions (more unpredictability) without reducing track time, and give people a reason to watch on Fridays.

[SB]

Or you could keep Q1 and Q2 times and have a continuous pole battle.

 

No, if someone set a mega lap in Q1 , or Q1 started in dry and rains after 5 mins, then Q2 would become meaningless.

 

Current system at least would force everyone to go out in Q2 again , which is better for the fans especailly those bought tickets for the race.

[Reinmuster]

It ain't broke... yet.

 

So I'll stick to the current setup but nice idea, JL14.

[SenorSjon]

The current 'luck' elements are whether someone impedes your lap, whether a yellow or red flag is shown on you, whether so many cars come out at once that you cannot find the space you require, whether they skies decide to open up and rain falls before you've managed to get out and set you time and probably other factors that I can't think of right now. These are all unfortunate events that can occur with the current system. But I fail to see why people are suggesting systems that will introduce more chance into the proceedings.

 

So that is why the track is empty between 8 - 3 minutes from the end most sessions. Ample time to do your lap.

[Heyli]

Or you could keep Q1 and Q2 times and have a continuous pole battle.

I dont like that. I like mix conditions. Could turn a qualifying into a useless excercise if it starts raining in Q2 or Q3. 

 

I like the current setup. Provides enough action and keeps me well entertained for the whole hour. 

[Beri]

I dont like that. I like mix conditions. Could turn a qualifying into a useless excercise if it starts raining in Q2 or Q3. 

 

I like the current setup. Provides enough action and keeps me well entertained for the whole hour. 

 

The current format cant be bettered in my opinion, it is near perfect and its the best format there ever has been in my book. Albeit, truth be said, Id love to have the single lap qualifying to be run at Monaco. To properly see every car and driver on the absolute limit without traffic and such.

[Heyli]

The current format cant be bettered in my opinion, it is near perfect and its the best format there ever has been in my book. Albeit, truth be said, Id love to have the single lap qualifying to be run at Monaco. To properly see every car and driver on the absolute limit without traffic and such.

very often the 1st run is pretty useless as most drivers are able to improve. However, very often does not mean always. And I like the build up of having 2 runs as well. You see a driver putting in a better banker lap and then you think, will he be able to repeat that, or will somebody else surprise on the 2nd all or nothing attempt?

 

I agree, I think this format is excellent. Nothing is perfect, but in the scope of F1 this is pretty close!

[Dara]

Just allow refueling, setup changes and fresh tyres in Parc Fermee so drivers can actually push again in Q.

[Heyli]

Just allow refueling, setup changes and fresh tyres in Parc Fermee so drivers can actually push again in Q.

How long has it been since you've watched F1?

 

Sure, I agree with the set-up changes, but the refueling and fresh tyres are allowef for quite some time already!

[Dara]

How long has it been since you've watched F1?

Sure, I agree with the set-up changes, but the refueling and fresh tyres are allowef for quite some time already!

Really? Well ever old enough to learn. I thought that was still forbidden.


I always believed they did Q with race fuel and started the race with q tires

Edited by Dara, 14 October 2024 - 08:33.

[tyker]

Really? Well ever old enough to learn. I thought that was still forbidden.


I always believed they did Q with race fuel and started the race with q tires

Race fuelled qualifying ended in 2010, I'm not sure when starting with Q tyres ended, has to be over 5 years now.

[Heyli]

Race fuelled qualifying ended in 2010, I'm not sure when starting with Q tyres ended, has to be over 5 years now.

only since 2022. (the Q2 Tyre qualifying rule)

[tyker]

only since 2022. (the Q2 Tyre qualifying rule)

Much sooner than what I thought then.

[TomNokoe]

I think a lot of people make the mistake of attributing the excitement of qualifying to the format, when really it's the qualifying itself that is the exciting part. I would also be in favour of a super pole instead of Q3.

It surprises me that the current format has sustained for so long, as with much of modern F1 (e.g. Pirelli 14 seasons and counting). In the past it felt like F1 was always changing, but we've now settled into a very safe "product", which I think we're worse off for.

[MikeTekRacing]

I think a lot of people make the mistake of attributing the excitement of qualifying to the format, when really it's the qualifying itself that is the exciting part. I would also be in favour of a super pole instead of Q3.

It surprises me that the current format has sustained for so long, as with much of modern F1 (e.g. Pirelli 14 seasons and counting). In the past it felt like F1 was always changing, but we've now settled into a very safe "product", which I think we're worse off for.

why are we worse for it?

it is proven to offer action throughout the hour, surprises in eliminations, challenges to get your timing right/

 

What is wrong with it?

[MikeTekRacing]

How long has it been since you've watched F1?

 

Sure, I agree with the set-up changes, but the refueling and fresh tyres are allowef for quite some time already!

not allowing set up changes makes sure you don't allow teams to optimize for both so you get some variation.

otherwise why would we expect action? You put the fastest cars in front....

[Winterapfel]

My view:

Currently, on the longer tracks, there already is sufficient pressure on the drivers, less time to e.g.abort a lap (after a mistake) and start again. Due to the time needed for outlap, fast lap and in lap, they have to hurry up and can't make mistakes.

So my counter proposal would be to reduce the duration of q1, q2 and q3 on the shorter/faster tracks, to create the same time pressure

[PayasYouRace]

not allowing set up changes makes sure you don't allow teams to optimize for both so you get some variation.

otherwise why would we expect action? You put the fastest cars in front....

It’s the opposite really. Without set up changes, you get the cars lining up in race pace order. When setup changes are allowed, you might get cars that are better in qualifying and other that are better in the race, so you’re more likely to get that variation.

[Risil]

Bring back elimination qualifying! Those were two glorious weeks.

[MikeTekRacing]

It’s the opposite really. Without set up changes, you get the cars lining up in race pace order. When setup changes are allowed, you might get cars that are better in qualifying and other that are better in the race, so you’re more likely to get that variation.

i am not sure that's the case.

We have had even this year cars out of order focused on qualy...or running a wet setup in a dry race because they took the gamble to optimize for qualy.

If you allow changes everyone runs optimal at the same moment

[TomNokoe]

why are we worse for it?
it is proven to offer action throughout the hour, surprises in eliminations, challenges to get your timing right/

What is wrong with it?

I say we are worse off because Liberty has settled in to a status quo where some parts of the sport are seemingly unimpeachable, despite glaring flaws.

Qualifying specifically? Traffic, blocking, track position fighting for slipstream, yellow/red flags, ultra-sensitive tyres, TV direction make for many unsatisfying and unfair moments. But we persist... because?

Specifically on the TV front, having 10, 15 or 20 cars setting laps at the same time and only watching one, or sometimes zero if we're outboard watching the finish line, is the exact opposite of what broadcasting is about. The excitement of live sport is being able to watch something unfold as it happens, not through timing graphics or replays.

The clearest example of this is Verstappen's unfinished lap at Saudi 2021. We saw all of it live, including the crash, and it made the moment so much more dramatic.

I also agree with others that single lap qualifying offers more of a challenge. Isn't this the purpose of sport, to test the drivers in as many ways as possible?

[MikeTekRacing]

isn't the sport supposed to be as fair as possible? Single lap is anything but fair. 

we are watching VERY close grids, with cars sometimes P1-P15 under 1 second. Single lap will ruin that. Why do we want that?

[pdac]

So that is why the track is empty between 8 - 3 minutes from the end most sessions. Ample time to do your lap.

 

So just impose a minimum number of outings in each session or increase the number of sessions so that each session is only 5 minutes long. But, really, what does it matter? The whole point of introducing 3 sessions was to make sure teams sent their cars out more. It worked.

Edited by pdac, 14 October 2024 - 20:40.

[SB]

isn't the sport supposed to be as fair as possible? Single lap is anything but fair. 

we are watching VERY close grids, with cars sometimes P1-P15 under 1 second. Single lap will ruin that. Why do we want that?

 

I cant imagine single lap in tracks with quick weather changes like spa (or sometimes Brazil) could be described as anything but fair.

 

It would work in short tracks (like ovals) but not in many track in F1 calendar.