Four Party Qualifying

[astracrazy]

Been seeing this about today:

https://www.planetf1.com/news/f1-debati ... -for-2019/

Not sure if its already posted here, but I couldn't see it.

They want to change it from 3 to 4 sessions. I personally don't see the point and we have been down this road in 2016. If they change anything, I would suggest getting rid of the q2 tyre rule, as I don't see what the brings at all?

A few races ago, I forget which one, we had a wet quali and dry race. It was great, we had difference strategies in the top 10 for a change. The current way, so drivers can get into q3, puts everyone on the same strategy.

[Phil]

I would suggest getting rid of the q2 tyre rule, as I don't see what the brings at all?

It adds the strategic element, similar to during the refueling era when cars had to qualify on race-fuel.

Earlier the rule was that the fastest lap Q3 tire had to be used for the 1st stint of the race. This created the issue that perhaps some didn't push as hard, not wanting to damage the tire to compromise the first stint. Fans wanted the drivers to go all out, maximum speed in Q3 for a great battle between the top teams, so the rule was changed so that it's the Q2 tire that is used.

I think having to use the Q2 tire for the top10 is great. It adds a bit of excitement since teams have to consider wisely if they can risk running the more durable tire during the 2nd stint, like in Singapore. Obviously, now that the top 3 teams are far ahead of the rest, the risk is predictable, but imagine if the gap narrows, then Q2 will become much more exciting again.

[Just_a_fan]

This feels like something driven by TV companies and advertising requirements. Just like the "start things at 10 minutes past the hour" to keep TV happy.

US media company takes on F1 and makes it fit US media requirements. Hardly a surprise.

Hiding it behind something "fans might like" is just smoke screen rubbish.

[Big Tea]

They claim they are ' looking for various ways to spice up grand prix weekend' then dabble with the one hour no one misses.

[ESPImperium]

Add two more teams and make it that the 6 slowest in each session are eliminated, Im in. As long as the Q4 session is a single 5 minute one lap shoot out session with the drivers on a single set of tyres.

I see no bloody reason it can't be done, and I think it would add some spice, especially in Q4, if the drivers lined up in fastest in Q3 goes last at the end of the pit lane, where they are released in 15 second intervals. Makes drivers really go for it, and with some tweaks to the rules to prevent non running in any session, we could just have the best ever qualifying we have ever seen.

They just need to do something with the penalty system, maybe introduce a system where it is taken in 2 second penalties per power unit element in the race, and a 10 second stop go out-with a pit stop for a whole new power unit to be taken any time in the race, if the car retires this is then taken to the next race or the team looses 10 constructors points?

We need to get more of a balance in the sport i think.

[Just_a_fan]

They claim they are ' looking for various ways to spice up grand prix weekend' then dabble with the one hour no one misses.

Exactly. Qualifying is spot on as it is. Except for not enough ad breaks, obviously, to fill the TV companies' coffers.

[Just_a_fan]

Add two more teams and make it that the 6 slowest in each session are eliminated, Im in. As long as the Q4 session is a single 5 minute one lap shoot out session with the drivers on a single set of tyres.

I see no bloody reason it can't be done, and I think it would add some spice, especially in Q4, if the drivers lined up in fastest in Q3 goes last at the end of the pit lane, where they are released in 15 second intervals. Makes drivers really go for it, and with some tweaks to the rules to prevent non running in any session, we could just have the best ever qualifying we have ever seen.

They just need to do something with the penalty system, maybe introduce a system where it is taken in 2 second penalties per power unit element in the race, and a 10 second stop go out-with a pit stop for a whole new power unit to be taken any time in the race, if the car retires this is then taken to the next race or the team looses 10 constructors points?

We need to get more of a balance in the sport i think.

More complicated, unnecessary, rules? No thanks.

I can already think of ways your single lap Q4 can be gamed by the teams to disadvantage an opponent using yellow flags, "messing up a corner" etc. Your lead driver goes slightly slower in Q3 so he goes before your number 2. He sets a quick Q4 lap. Number 2 then spins, runs wide etc. and messes up the competitor's lap. Only way to avoid that would be resetting the session to give following drivers a fair single lap. TV won't like thst, for a start.

Also, the nice thing about the current Q3 is that the drivers want to be last on track as that is when, generally, it's at its best. You'd give the best track to the already quickest driver. Not very balanced. What happens when it's a changeable track? E.g. a shower of rain before or during the session? If you're lucky you get the best track and your competitor has no chance to improve his position. Being able to jockey for best track condition is part of the drivers' skill set. Good ones do it better than less able ones.

We had single shot qualifying in the past. It wasn't very good then and your suggestion is no better now.

[sosic2121]

I would suggest getting rid of the q2 tyre rule, as I don't see what the brings at all?

It adds the strategic element, similar to during the refueling era when cars had to qualify on race-fuel.

Earlier the rule was that the fastest lap Q3 tire had to be used for the 1st stint of the race. This created the issue that perhaps some didn't push as hard, not wanting to damage the tire to compromise the first stint. Fans wanted the drivers to go all out, maximum speed in Q3 for a great battle between the top teams, so the rule was changed so that it's the Q2 tire that is used.

IMO it adds only to the gap between top 3 and the rest. Other teams have to push 100% on softest to get to Q3 while top 3 can choose the tire to start the race.

We need to close the gap, not make it even bigger than it is.

[wesley123]

“They’ve been doing a lot of research among fans, and they feel this is one of the things that the fans would like.

“Slightly shorter [sessions], slightly shorter time between them, four go out in Q1, four, four, leaving eight.

a.k.a they try to appeal to people who turn on the tv somewhere in the middle and after 5 minutes starts screaming there isn't enough overtaking.

They are trying to appeal to a group you can't ever appeal to. Because let's face it; If they were reachable, they would have been more content by now considering the amount of changes F1 has applied in the past decade.

[Phil]

I would suggest getting rid of the q2 tyre rule, as I don't see what the brings at all?

It adds the strategic element, similar to during the refueling era when cars had to qualify on race-fuel.

Earlier the rule was that the fastest lap Q3 tire had to be used for the 1st stint of the race. This created the issue that perhaps some didn't push as hard, not wanting to damage the tire to compromise the first stint. Fans wanted the drivers to go all out, maximum speed in Q3 for a great battle between the top teams, so the rule was changed so that it's the Q2 tire that is used.

IMO it adds only to the gap between top 3 and the rest. Other teams have to push 100% on softest to get to Q3 while top 3 can choose the tire to start the race.

We need to close the gap, not make it even bigger than it is.

It doesn't. It compromises the top10, as they have to start on a used tire, while P11 and beyond have free choice of tires and therefore can start on a better tire for the race. If everyone had free-choice for the race, everyone would use the best tire to start on and thus the top10 would no longer be compromised on the first stint.

Those that "push hard to get into Q3" generally have more tires to their disposal because they are not running in Q3.

The Singapore GP is a nice example on how those from P11 and beyond (Alonso & Co.) had an advantage over those starting in the top 10.

[Big Tea]

I think maybe they are using what one of my lecturers told us was 'fact'. He said people can not keep a thread longer than 20 min.
This was several years ago and it has probably dropped to 10 min now, so they want 'bite sized' (buss word or sound bite speak) sections where they only need to remember a few colour cars.

[notsofast]

There's nothing wrong with qualifying with the possible exception of the duration of Q1. Do we really need Q1 to be so long that cars can do three stints? How about shortening Q1. Leave more time for a long ad break. (Ka-ching!) And also allow the teams to make changes to their cars. Declare parc ferme at the start of Q2, not at the start of Q1.

[Big Tea]

There's nothing wrong with qualifying with the possible exception of the duration of Q1. Do we really need Q1 to be so long that cars can do three stints? How about shortening Q1. Leave more time for a long ad break. (Ka-ching!) And also allow the teams to make changes to their cars. Declare parc ferme at the start of Q2, not at the start of Q1.

The advantage of the longer Q1 is that it gives the cars time to dry out the track.
I suspect they also have in mind what will happen when more teams stump up and we could have 26 cars on track looking for a clean run

[rscsr]

There's nothing wrong with qualifying with the possible exception of the duration of Q1. Do we really need Q1 to be so long that cars can do three stints? How about shortening Q1. Leave more time for a long ad break. (Ka-ching!) And also allow the teams to make changes to their cars. Declare parc ferme at the start of Q2, not at the start of Q1.

It was at the beginning 15min in each session, but the cars were just in the pits, waiting for the clock to run down. Therefore they shortened it to 12min and putting those 3min to Q1, where more time was needed anyway, since a lot of times they couldn't find a suitable gap.

[Andres125sx]

“They’ve been doing a lot of research among fans, and they feel this is one of the things that the fans would like.

“Slightly shorter [sessions], slightly shorter time between them, four go out in Q1, four, four, leaving eight.

a.k.a they try to appeal to people who turn on the tv somewhere in the middle and after 5 minutes starts screaming there isn't enough overtaking.

They are trying to appeal to a group you can't ever appeal to. Because let's face it; If they were reachable, they would have been more content by now considering the amount of changes F1 has applied in the past decade.

So any change should make fans happy?

I can´t understand people like you who assume fans are stupid and don´t know what they want. Do you feel like that yourself?

Maybe, only maybe, fans get bored with races where there´s no change at all in more than one hour, and the only changes we see are caused by artificial rules like DRS wich means not even those changes are exciting.

Fans are not stupid, at least generally, even if their likings are different to yours