Fans asked to vote on qualifying (merged)

[Dutton]

Proposal 2 would be too "complex" to be viable: we would end up with complications and complaints and so on.

Simpler is preferable.

[Rennen]

I thought the old 1 hour system where nobody went out for the first half of it...and then there was a made scramble at the end was dangerous and undignified!

The current system of one flying lap would be very pure if the cars were all on low fuel. we all know the tyres 'sweet spot' is only available in the first flying lap, so nothing is gained in pounding around like a Formula Ford.

The essence of an F1 driver is to put it all together in one supreme lap of excellence...lone cars doing a flying lap in turn is good exposure for sponsors and allows us lot to make comparisons. The only unfair element is that they allow other classes to use the track between final practice and qualifying which destroys the F1 rubberline which is what F1 tyre technology is all about...rubber on rubber.

One way to avoid that would be to have two qually sessions...the second in reverse order...with the drivers best lap from either session (not aggregated!) to count.

Failing that I voted for option 2...sounds like fun !

[Dutton]

The other alternative is to abandon the idea of a qualifying session altogether, and provide one more practice session.

The grid is arranged according to the fastest time set by each driver in practice (3rd drivers' times would not be considered), taking all sessions of the weekend into account.

I'd be up for that.

[Frank_White]

The best thing about option 2... and the reason why I think it is structured like that, is to free up track space for the best and the brightest qualifiers. That way there will be no moving chicanes to affect potentially brilliant qualifying battles.

I think that the structure is a great idea.

[Sodemo]

Im not sure, both proposals don't really do it for me, although both are better than the current system.
The only system I would WANT to see back is the old 60 min free for all, but with current engine regs, it makes it tricky.

[Dixie Flatline]

Neither option is truly satisfactory in my view, but thought the second option slightly shaded it, for many of the reasons expressed by the other posters above.

[Marbot]

I like the "Knockout" option,although i'm not sure how it would work under the current two engine rule.But i guess if you want that pole position you've just got to keep going and hope the engine holds out in the race.

[mabs_nsx]

I didn't like either Proposal 1 or Proposal 2 but I voted for Proposal 2. Qualifying should be as follows:

Qualifying 1
In Q1 drivers can complete an unlimited amount of laps over 1 hour.
No fuel restrictions - cars may refuel during and after the session.

qualifying 2
Q2 is the same alowing drivers to attempt to improve on their best Q1 lap time.
No fuel restrictions - cars may refuel during and after the session.

[avsfan733]

how botu a 1 hour free for all no rules no lap restrictions...wanna encourage people to go out on track? just make it clear any complaints of blocking will be ignored in the second half

[Gerben24]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

One hour 12 laps no fuel limit..may the best driver and team win!

YESSSSS!!! I was affraid nobody was going to mention the old system. I like this the best. Who cares if you don't see any cars in the first half hour (which was one of the reason they went for a different qualy system). In the end they still need to qualify...

[Mal]

Surely and unrestricted number of laps is better for us. I like option 2 as it will give plenty of track action, and the last 30mins should be great with the best 10 cars is an all out session without too much of a traffic problem.

There is still the potential for cars being out of position, if they dont get it togather in the forst two sessions.

My only resevation is that the first session in particular could be dangerous with eveyone desparate to set a time all at once.

[Sodemo]

Why doesn't the FIA set a rule whereby at the start of the season the teams have to produce 1 qualifying engine, and they use this engine up to the midway point of the season, then the teams get to "nominate" a new quali engine?

[BootsOntheSide]

Having two qualifying sessions is a stupid idea that has caused many problems in the past. When the first session is dry and the second is wet, the second is a waste of eveyrone's time. Also, it proved confusing for the fans to have two seperate 'results' published, only one of which represents the actual grid. You've got to remember that TV would only show 1 session, and they wouldn't want the confusing and occasiona pointlessness elements.

[Logrence]

According to the FIA survey only about 30% of the people who watch the races watch qualifying anyway, so it's a moot point what they do with qualifying, so long as they make it easy for Jim Rosenthal to explain on a sunday afternoon.

[jondownunder]

Both proposals are stupid. Have the teams learned nothing from all the criticism? Aggregate times only make things confusing, and proposal 2 just beggars belief. Imagine explaining that to casual viewers on a Saturday afternoon. Also IMO approaches the non-meritocratic rules deciding the GP2 race 2 grids (off-topic: why should Olivier Pla, erratic all season, have a clear run to a win just for finishing 8th in race 1 at Silverstone?). Personally I think the current one-session, one-lap system is better than either of these (though I'd much prefer a single 1hr, 12-lap session - perhaps with a rule making it compulsory to go out in each quarter as someone suggested).

[josvandeperre]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

One hour 12 laps no fuel limit..may the best driver and team win!

What a sensible chap - lives in a splendid place and cares about F1 - absolutely

What I find incredible is that after decades of autocracy Bernie wants us to believe he'll pay any attention to anything anyone (least of all the fans...) says since presumably that is the implication of his site hosting this proposal

[Sodemo]

I voted for proposal 2.

[BootsOntheSide]

Originally Posted by Logrence

According to the FIA survey only about 30% of the people who watch the races watch qualifying anyway, so it's a moot point what they do with qualifying, so long as they make it easy for Jim Rosenthal to explain on a sunday afternoon.

This is a very short-sighted attitude. If only 10% of race viewers watched qualifying, a lot less people would get to watch it the year after, as terrestrial TV would simply consider it to not be worthwhile form an advertising perspective.

[Kirk]

I'm not too keen on those marathon qualifying sessions. Although it is nice for the fan to see the cars on the track for a good stretch, it simply is too easy for the drivers. I quite like the do or die hot lap format. I also like the idea of qualy on low fuel to properly assess each drivers pace. For those reasons I would prefer that the they return to the aggregate qualy, like earlier this year, just don't spread it out until Sunday. If it is necessary to have a gap between the 2 sessions then why not have them on Friday and Saturday? Leave Sunday for the race. That should also keep the TV networks happy.
As for the aggregate confusing the fans: firstly, the casual fan does not tune in to qualy anyway but I also think that the TV coverage was poor and made it more confusing. Some simple calculations can shed a bunch of light on what an individual driver must do, or is trying to do. The networks need to get their $hit together and do the math. Post both the individual lap time as well as the aggregate; also post the time each driver needs to do to gain a spot on the grid and to gain the pole.
From the drivers 2nd time in qualy, conclusions such as fuel strategy can be pretty well deduced. As for Boots' argument about the mixed weather possibilities. That to adds to the drama and forces teams to really work on their strategy for each session. Its all quite fun really, considering it's only 2 laps by each driver, there's much more to it than meets the eye.

[foreversideways]

What was wrong with the orignal hour long qualifying. Either unlimited laps or restricted, all on track at once. Remember those great qualiying sessions by Ayrton or Nigel or even Keke, taking pole in the last minute of the session. See Motorsport this month where Keke explains his 160 MPH lap at Silverstone. He had the pole already by half a second but went out again, "just because he had the tyres and could". Now that really is what motor racing should be about.

[Logrence]

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

This is a very short-sighted attitude. If only 10% of race viewers watched qualifying, a lot less people would get to watch it the year after, as terrestrial TV would simply consider it to not be worthwhile form an advertising perspective.

Good job I'm only posting my opinion on an F1 forum and not running the FIA then, isn't it.

My point was that those 30% are always going to be there - they are the F1 fans. The issue is about Sunday's race, not qualifying - I think people are missing the real problem. It's the ordinary man off the street, the channel-hopper, that F1 needs to attract, not the base support.

[djinvicta]

Well ; Ithink it goes to prove most want the return of the old 1 hour quali, with its balls out, go for it attitude. So you have to wait for some of it before a car appears; it adds to the suspense, and its equal. Hope BE is watching.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by The Monster

Im not sure, both proposals don't really do it for me, although both are better than the current system.
The only system I would WANT to see back is the old 60 min free for all, but with current engine regs, it makes it tricky.

Not only with the current engine regulatons, but with the current tyre regulations as well.

[Pingguest]

Everyone who says that the proposals are stupid, just like these proposals are, should vote for the last option. That will give the FIA something to think about.

[Crashfishy]

I'm not sure about either..I liked the format that they used to have a few years ago, the qualifying hour where each driver had 12 laps...
But the second option sounds interesting...