Here's a suggestion

ttc · 27 Aug 2004, 14:25 (Ref:1079194)

You want a "race" with lots of overtaking?

Simple.

First race of the season, ONE qualifying session. 1hr. 12laps each. Fastest on pole.

Second race onwards, REVERSE the finishing order. Winner starts last. 2nd start 2nd from last, 3rd start 3rd from last and so on.

Penalizing winners? Not really since every winner will have to do it the same for the next race.

Artificial grid and GP winners? Probably. But it will satisfy the so-called "no overtaking = boring" and "no overtaking = no race" crowd.

Flame away...

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Aug 2004, 14:32 (Ref:1079199)

Just like Thursday night stock cars.

You don't work for Spedeworth do you?

climb · 27 Aug 2004, 14:59 (Ref:1079228)

You don' t improve racing adjusting rules to help the losers.

It's the losers themselves which have to find a way to get more competitive.

Cougar · 27 Aug 2004, 15:00 (Ref:1079229)

If you had the fastest car (like Ferrari do now) all you would need to do is qualify 1st for the 1st race. Then retire for the 2nd race as it starts making sure you are the 1st person to retire and so start the next race 1st again... Theoretically you will win 50% of the races... and this should be good enough for the title...

Kirk · 27 Aug 2004, 15:10 (Ref:1079240)

Quote:

Originally posted by Cougar21
If you had the fastest car (like Ferrari do now) all you would need to do is qualify 1st for the 1st race. Then retire for the 2nd race as it starts making sure you are the 1st person to retire and so start the next race 1st again... Theoretically you will win 50% of the races... and this should be good enough for the title...

LOL

, typical F1 thinking: The moment a new rule is proposed you look for a loophole, just like the teams. Pity!

There have been various (less drastic) suggestions along those lines but we wouldn't want to have all that overtaking in F1. It might bring fans to their feet!

**Adam43** · 27 Aug 2004, 15:18 (Ref:1079253)

Sounds very Jason Plato.

Marbot · 27 Aug 2004, 15:21 (Ref:1079254)

Quote:

Originally posted by climb
You don' t improve racing adjusting rules to help the losers.

It's the losers themselves which have to find a way to get more competitive.

How do they become more competetive?:confused:

Paarma · 27 Aug 2004, 15:25 (Ref:1079257)

It sounds like a very artificial solution. Basicly it would inflate the overtaking maneuver. We like to see overtaking because we know how difficult it is to do properly and because we know how easy it is to destroy the car and any chance of victory in the process. I'd love to see more overtaking but it's not exiting to watch a ferrari overtaking one of the minardis.

climb · 27 Aug 2004, 15:27 (Ref:1079258)

Quote:

Originally posted by martyn bott
How do they become more competetive?:confused:

Dunno, but you can ask Ferrari how they did about 10 yrs ago

Marbot · 27 Aug 2004, 15:34 (Ref:1079263)

So Minardi just need to poach,Ross brawn,Jean todt,Rory byrne and they've cracked it.

Marbot · 27 Aug 2004, 15:36 (Ref:1079264)

Forgot to mention Michael schumacher.

Paarma · 27 Aug 2004, 16:05 (Ref:1079301)

I'd love to see Schumacher in a minardi. While I'm not a fan, I think he would do well.

BootsOntheSide · 27 Aug 2004, 18:15 (Ref:1079411)

Not as well as Baumgartner would in a Ferrari though - which is the worst thing about seeing Ferrari dominate.

Ideas like these always have loopholes, and they often have reasons why they could alienate more people than they attract. F1 has never needed things like reverse or random grids to provide excitement before, and I'm not sure it does now. There are so many changes that can be made to tyres, aerodynamics, driver aids, circuit designs etc. that would improve things much more.

ralf fan · 27 Aug 2004, 18:25 (Ref:1079416)

Id rather have overtaking by changing the factors that Boots mentioned above...

what artificial grids or reverse orders would do is see the fast guys overtake the slower guys which we see when they lap each other..... id rather like to see the fast guys overtake each other...

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Aug 2004, 18:29 (Ref:1079421)

Quote:

Originally posted by BootsOntheSide
There are so many changes that can be made to tyres, aerodynamics, driver aids, circuit designs etc. that would improve things much more.

I read today that whilst the testing ban is imposed the teams have spent loads of time in their "wind tunnels".

Excuse me but isn't this just another way of improving aerodynamics and it has to be said a vast cost. When reducing aerodynamics and allowing them to test tyres, brakes, etc. would be so much cheaper and more interesting. We really have lost the plot don't you think?

Marbot · 27 Aug 2004, 18:46 (Ref:1079432)

How do you regulate time spent in a wind tunnel?,the FIA have at some time got to take into consideration the amount of money and time each team spends on development and come up with some sort of handicap system for the constructors championship,hopefully this would discourage excessive spending.

Kirk · 27 Aug 2004, 18:55 (Ref:1079439)

Quote:

Originally posted by ralf fan
Id rather have overtaking by changing the factors that Boots mentioned above...

what artificial grids or reverse orders would do is see the fast guys overtake the slower guys which we see when they lap each other..... id rather like to see the fast guys overtake each other...

Call it artificial if you prefer but introducing WDC points for qualifying order would make it less than that. As for the statement about faster guys passing slower guys, yes we see it today with the assistance of blue flags, so that in itself is artificial.... and another sore spot imo. As someone mentioned there are a lot of other ways to improve the racing and I agree. Trouble is their acceptance and adoption. Let's PLEASE start somewhere to make F1 the spectacle that it can be. The proposed 25 percent reduction in aerodynamics is well short of a baby step in that direction.

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Aug 2004, 19:01 (Ref:1079443)

Martyn,

That wasn't my point.

My point was that to suggest that there is benefit in spending vast sums of cash on a wind tunnel and then using it instead of testing on the track is a bit of an anomoly or do you think that testing a car without a driver is a good thing? (Not a dig at you BTW.)

BootsOntheSide · 27 Aug 2004, 20:23 (Ref:1079499)

The point about blue flags is an interesting one - I feel that throwing these immediately when a car gets close is a bit of a shame - as long as they aren't being consciously held up by a backmarker, I don't think the blue flags should intervene anywhere near as quickly as they do. Passing backmarkers is a skill in itself, and often creates overtaking chances.

Limits on testing are quite ineffectual, because the biggest teams usually have the most/best wind tunnel and computer-simulation technology, and you can't regulate this aspect as it happens away from the racetracks.

Marbot · 27 Aug 2004, 20:36 (Ref:1079513)

Quote:

Originally posted by Peter Mallett
Martyn,

That wasn't my point.

My point was that to suggest that there is benefit in spending vast sums of cash on a wind tunnel and then using it instead of testing on the track is a bit of an anomoly or do you think that testing a car without a driver is a good thing? (Not a dig at you BTW.)

Point taken,the top teams do both and far too much of it.

ttc · 28 Aug 2004, 00:29 (Ref:1079642)

The point that my FIRMLY "tongue in cheek" suggestion (if you haven't figure that out yet) is that given the reliability and technological advances in manufacturing, faster cars will always be at the front of the grid upon qualifying barring some fuel load "anormalies".

IMO, banning refueling and pitstop, one of the more popular suggestions, ONLY seal the fate of slower cars as they have to carry just as much fuel, and no chance of using strategy to "pass" the faster car using pitstops (not that that is happening frequently even now but at least there is a chance).

And at this moment, due to the fact that the rest of the so-called top teams are failing to pose a challenge, Ferrari is dominating, which SOMEHOW generates "boredom" and ill wills from "no overtaking = boring race" fans to the extent that most are apportioning the blame on Ferrari and blaming them for so-called not allowing their drivers to "race", as if Ruben's attempts so far to keep up with MS was always successful.

How to really improve racing? It's my believe that the balls are in the other teams' court. Of course, rules changes that regulate and reduce aerodynamic influences on following cars will make it easier for slipstreaming and perhaps more overtaking, but please do not advocate going back in time by abandoning technology advancement.

Teretonga · 28 Aug 2004, 00:48 (Ref:1079653)

Posted by Peter Mallet
"Excuse me but isn't this just another way of improving aerodynamics and it has to be said a vast cost. When reducing aerodynamics and allowing them to test tyres, brakes, etc. would be so much cheaper and more interesting. We really have lost the plot don't you think?"

Yes. Absolutely!

Kirk · 28 Aug 2004, 02:23 (Ref:1079680)

ttc, you and others are assuming that this is about Ferrari and it is not. The more sensitive seem to think that if another team were dominating that somehow the problem would be less. It wouldn't ... and make no mistake, it is a big problem exasperated by the fact that the self-indulging top teams for whatever reason would rather ignore or don't want to face. A few more disgraces like the last "race" will only make things worse.

Omega99 · 28 Aug 2004, 05:11 (Ref:1079723)

An... interesting idea

It certainly would create a literal battle for last place in the dying stages of the race. "We aren't in the points so just drive as slow as possible and finish last" There would be two races going on. The one at +200mph and the one at around 2-3mph...

touringcarnut · 28 Aug 2004, 09:41 (Ref:1079816)

Quote:

Originally posted by Omega99
An... interesting idea It certainly would create a literal battle for last place in the dying stages of the race. "We aren't in the points so just drive as slow as possible and finish last" There would be two races going on. The one at +200mph and the one at around 2-3mph...

There's the problem - the safety issue of some cars going slow whilst others are giving 100%!

I think the reverse grid idea could work if it was randomly drawn out a pot on race day, say have a short straw which when picked leads to a reverse grid. So you could have a Minardi on pole, only knowing about it 2 hours before the race start!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Just a suggestion	King Arthur	Rallying & Rallycross	37	28 Apr 2005 03:20
A Suggestion	Minardi fan	Virtual Racers	6	22 Mar 2000 17:55