dumrick wrote:Patrick Head suggests the starting grid to be defined according to championship position, in reversed order. Something that wouldn't take any tech regulations changes, would be straightforward to understand, would balance the field, would force drivers to try harder to climb up the field and could provide some interesting tactics from the teams, whose position wouldn't be anymore correlated with their speed but could give radically different agendas to different teams (nowadays, the last qualifiers aren't planning their strategy to win, naturally, so everyone follows the simulator's "optimal" strategy with some tweaks...).
Honestly, had this suggestion
come from almost anyone else than Patrick, I would've scoffed and brushed it aside, being "
that much of a purist". Obviously, one of my greatest regrets in implementing something like this would be losing the qualifying - no-one will go for the pole if it is to be found at 24th of the grid. That being said, the current system (
with race fuel tactics and all) is still a far cry from the excitement of the drivers going all out with new tyres and a minimal fuel load. Given that Bernie & Co. will not like losing any TV time, perhaps this could be brought back in a simple points-earning format for Saturday.
What delights me in Patrick's thinking is that I perceive the logic to be founded on solid technical/engineering grounds. He's no doubt witnessed the discussions about
adjustable winglets,
kinetic energy recovery systems and
push to pass systems all of which must appear at least somewhat gimmicky, misplaced and artificial to a hard core F1 engineer. Taking one step back and trying to establish an integral of the wider problem could very well produce this simple solution: "
Rather than trying to engineer overtaking, let us engineer in an environment where there is overtaking.".
This could relieve much of the unnecessary micro-managment pressure coming from FIA/Mosley, something that has essentially just produced rules that prevent engineers from doing their jobs in a motivating, relevant environment - in essence, properly. I might be wrong, but I also view this (
and Marmorini's KERS comments) as an exercise in "
rattling the shackles" or "
a freedom call", perhaps signalling the beginning of a wider effort to get F1 technology back on an agreeable, sustainable and inspiring track.
As to the racing side of things, there are also some things to consider. Could the current points system stand? I doubt it. Without thinking it through too much, perhaps positions gained during the race (
minus the ones "gifted" by DNFs/DQs) should amount to points. Podium places are another rather obvious cause for compensation. Some sorts of mathematical models will have to be established to test such systems, perhaps based on self organising maps or something. If anything, the result should be such that any on-track event can be easily perceived in light of the points by the fans - in a manner that makes sense.
