[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[EffectiveSprinkles]

The point is, I don't think anyone really knows the intention. I believe it's mostly a relic of the old rule that one had to qualify with race fuel. It's some sort of weird idea that hampering the top 10 drivers has a positive effect on the race. Who knows anymore at this point? And to me it also doesn't really matter. In my opinion it harms the midfield teams, reduces strategy options and also reduces the amount of racing that can be done in the first stint. And for people who like that stuff it can also help with building excitement before the race.

I watch every MotoGP race (as I think anyone who likes racing should ) and it's often a mystery who starts on what tyre right until the tyre warmers go off for the warm up lap. And it's much more likely that someone throws a curveball with tyre selection and wins the race unexpectedly. More strategy options = better racing, in my opinion.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

The point is, I don't think anyone really knows the intention. I believe it's mostly a relic of the old rule that one had to qualify with race fuel. It's some sort of weird idea that hampering the top 10 drivers has a positive effect on the race. Who knows anymore at this point? And to me it also doesn't really matter. In my opinion it harms the midfield teams, reduces strategy options and also reduces the amount of racing that can be done in the first stint. And for people who like that stuff it can also help with building excitement before the race.

I watch every MotoGP race (as I think anyone who likes racing should ) and it's often a mystery who starts on what tyre right until the tyre warmers go off for the warm up lap. And it's much more likely that someone throws a curveball with tyre selection and wins the race unexpectedly. More strategy options = better racing, in my opinion.

It was brought in to improve the spectacle of Q3, which it does, so it is still relevant.
It also helps ensure that the top teams are at the front more often, which is surely right in F1?

If it was scrapped altogether, but teams still worked within an overall tyre allocation, I think you might go back to teams sitting in the garage saving tyres, rather than wasting rubber in qualifying.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

It was brought in to improve the spectacle of Q3, which it does, so it is still relevant.
It also helps ensure that the top teams are at the front more often, which is surely right in F1?

If it was scrapped altogether, but teams still worked within an overall tyre allocation, I think you might go back to teams sitting in the garage saving tyres, rather than wasting rubber in qualifying.

I vaguely remember it being put in place due to explicit examples of teams sitting in the garage during Q3. Again, if I remember correctly (feel free to correct me if my memory is wrong) it was painful from a spectators perspective. Particularly on broadcast TV. Weather was good, it was Q3 and track was empty. Shots of people standing around for minute on end.

Three phase qualifying was designed to build to a climax. Not to go out with a whimper.

Richard

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

It was brought in to improve the spectacle of Q3, which it does, so it is still relevant.
It also helps ensure that the top teams are at the front more often, which is surely right in F1?

If it was scrapped altogether, but teams still worked within an overall tyre allocation, I think you might go back to teams sitting in the garage saving tyres, rather than wasting rubber in qualifying.

Again, I would ask you to actually read my proposal. Nothing about qualifying itself changes. People still get an extra set in Q3.

And the only reason there was no spectacle in Q3 was of this very same rule that was brought in. It now just applies to Q2 instead of Q3. I'm advocating only for getting rid of the Q2 requirement too. No other changes. I really don't know how much more clear I can make myself.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

Again, I would ask you to actually read my proposal. Nothing about qualifying itself changes. People still get an extra set in Q3.

And the only reason there was no spectacle in Q3 was of this very same rule that was brought in. It now just applies to Q2 instead of Q3. I'm advocating only for getting rid of the Q2 requirement too. No other changes. I really don't know how much more clear I can make myself.

I'm sorry - until this post I had not seen any proposal made other than to scrap the rule, accompanied by a query over why the rule exists.

It was not clear to me that the original question was rhetorical - and I now am unclear whether your proposal is to:

A - scrap the rule that says that Q3 runners use Q2 tyres in the race

B - scrap the tyre allocation rules entirely over the weekend

C - get rid of the Q2 requirement to use tyres from the weekend allocation (give them a free set in Q2)

or some other version of the rule(s)?

Could you please explain your proposal?

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

A - scrap the rule that says that Q3 runners use Q2 tyres in the race

I've repeatedly stated this. That's literally all my proposal is. Scrap the rule that Q3 runners need to start on Q3 tyres. That's all. Nothing else. No other rules added, no other rules altered. Just scrapping the requirement for the Q3 runners to start on Q2 tyres. I hope I'm finally clear enough, if not then I guess I'm not speaking English

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

I've repeatedly stated this. That's literally all my proposal is. Scrap the rule that Q3 runners need to start on Q3 tyres. That's all. Nothing else. No other rules added, no other rules altered. Just scrapping the requirement for the Q3 runners to start on Q2 tyres. I hope I'm finally clear enough, if not then I guess I'm not speaking English

OK, now I see it.

One question though - in your proposal all teams will just use the fastest tyre in Q2 by default, making the result of Q2 (and by extension Q3) more predictable. Is this what you want to see?

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

One question though - in your proposal all teams will just use the fastest tyre in Q2 by default, making the result of Q2 (and by extension Q3) more predictable. Is this what you want to see?

This is what happens now. Again, I've already stated that even if sometimes a top3 team uses harder tyres there is never any question on whether they go through or not. If they're even remotely under threat they just bolt on a set of softer tyres anyway.

[E.B]

I quite like qualy as it is, as it offers some Q3 likely teams the chance to roll the dice, knowing that the purpose of Q2 is to be fast enough to get into Q3. I like the option for teams trying to get through Q2 on a slower tyre that is a better option to actually run longer at the start of the race using an alternative strategy. I also like that those out of the ten get the freedom to use whatever tyre they likr thus increasing their chances of gaining places by alternative strategies to those at the front.

Using the Q3 as a free for all for the sole purpose of going for the ultimate lap is part of what makes qualifying so exciting in the dying moments.

In a nutshell I like qualifying as it is. The race for pole in Q3 is uncompromising by the need to conserve tyres for the race. Works for me.It is the only time in the weekend we see cars and drivers at their absolute maximum.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by E.B

I quite like qualy as it is, as it offers some Q3 likely teams the chance to roll the dice, knowing that the purpose of Q2 is to be fast enough to get into Q3. I like the option for teams trying to get through Q2 on a slower tyre that is a better option to actually run longer at the start of the race using an alternative strategy.

But that hardly ever happens. And again, if that rule is scrapped there will be more alternative strategies at the start. Also, like I said, this option is only available to the top 3 teams. Renault, Haas or Force India do not have this option now. If you like alternative strategies the current rule prevents most of that from happening.

Also once again I'm not advocating for a change in qualifying itself. I'm advocating for a change to the race start regulations. Qualifying is fine like it is.

I'm baffled why people seem to think I'm trying to say Q3 needs to be changed. I can't for the life of me figure out why people consistently get that wrong

[Adam43]

Is this what reddit is like? (This is a rhetorical question)

Maybe you weren't clear originally? (this is rhetorical too and does not need lots of quotes proving something or other). Now that it is clear perhaps the discussion would benefit from other users not being told they are stupid, again? (rhetorical). It's not a fight after all.

[Peter Mallett]

Ultimately we should.understand that points are only awarded for the race. Ergo IMHO there is no need to make Qualifying a show. But I'd be a in a minority if I voiced that.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Ultimately we should.understand that points are only awarded for the race. Ergo IMHO there is no need to make Qualifying a show. But I'd be a in a minority if I voiced that.

I like this. I would chose the every session counted if I could. Or go back to one or two hour sessions. Plenty of tyres, do what you want. I was at an Austrian GP where they didn't turn out for half an hour too.

But I do admit the current format is good for telly and I do enjoy it.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I like this. I would chose the every session counted if I could. Or go back to one or two hour sessions. Plenty of tyres, do what you want. I was at an Austrian GP where they didn't turn out for half an hour too.

But I do admit the current format is good for telly and I do enjoy it.

I seem to recall that during the year that Damon Hill became WDC, he would go out earlyish in the qualifying session to put in a banker, then would sit in the car in the garage, with his eyes shut tight imagining the best way around the circuit, and then go out in the dying moments of the session and grab the pole.


Back then, at least during half of the qualifying time there would no cars on track. I can also recall all the times that the top teams would stay in the garages until the lower order had "swept" the track of any dust and had laid down some rubber.


At least none of that goes on nowadays.

[Peter Mallett]

Yes it did lead to quiet periods but it also gave us the uncertainty of whether a team could do the business. And yes I understand irony too.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

Also once again I'm not advocating for a change in qualifying itself. I'm advocating for a change to the race start regulations. Qualifying is fine like it is.

I'm baffled why people seem to think I'm trying to say Q3 needs to be changed. I can't for the life of me figure out why people consistently get that wrong

Because it has to be accepted that - if the race start tyre requirements change from those currently in use - then Q2 and Q3 are also affected.

Free choice of tyres in Q2 and Q3 means that only those teams who think they can make Q3 are likely to run. And will always run with the fastest compound in Q2. Then only the top 4 cars are likely to set a time in Q3. This would make qualifying less important to teams, because they would be focussed on the race tyre options.

This might be a good thing, I'm not arguing for or against the change. Just pointing out that removing the 'Q2 tyres for Q3 cars' rule will affect qualifying, possibly more so than the race and could lead to more processional racing.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Why not have a free choice of tyres throughout qualifying, with teams declaring which tyre they are going to start the race on, after qualifying has finished?

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Is this what reddit is like? (This is a rhetorical question)

Maybe you weren't clear originally? (this is rhetorical too and does not need lots of quotes proving something or other). Now that it is clear perhaps the discussion would benefit from other users not being told they are stupid, again? (rhetorical). It's not a fight after all.

It would help if people would react to what I write, not to what I'm not writing. Nobody even bothers to counter the points I bring up. That's frustrating, as you can imagine.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Free choice of tyres in Q2 and Q3 means that only those teams who think they can make Q3 are likely to run.

This is not true. Q2 determines grid positions. Nothing would change. Why do you think it would?

And will always run with the fastest compound in Q2.

This is the case now. Because people have two objectives: get as far up the grid as possible and get into Q3.

Then only the top 4 cars are likely to set a time in Q3.

I can't possibly imagine why that might be the case. I would love some clarification on this.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I like this. I would chose the every session counted if I could.

Somewhat related to this is the current ruleset in MotoGP (sorry to bring that up again, but they do a lot of things right ). Free practice 1 through 3 count for qualifying which is split up into two parts: Q1 and Q2. The top 10 fastest times from FP1 through to FP3 get into Q2, the rest goes into Q1. Top two riders from Q1 also get to have a go in Q2 so it's a 12 man pole shootout. There is also FP4 on Saturday which counts for nothing.

This makes free practices count for something because if you get in you're guaranteed 12th place on the grid. That's a huge incentive for a lot of riders. I'm not saying F1 should adopt this, but having free practices count for something can be rather exciting.

[Akrapovic]

If everyone is misunderstanding you, then it is unlikely that the problem is with everyone.

That said, we appear to be heading down the rabbit hole of suggesting fixes for the rules, which is how we got into this sort of situation in the first place. Introduce a rule which has side effects, and then introduces more rules to deal with those side effects, etc. Eventually, you have a huge tree or rules which are designed to deal with each other more than anything else.

The qualifying format is already a little complicated for what it is. As Peter said, it's not for points, so does it need to be this complicated?

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If everyone is misunderstanding you, then it is unlikely that the problem is with everyone.

That said, we appear to be heading down the rabbit hole of suggesting fixes for the rules, which is how we got into this sort of situation in the first place. Introduce a rule which has side effects, and then introduces more rules to deal with those side effects, etc. Eventually, you have a huge tree or rules which are designed to deal with each other more than anything else.

The qualifying format is already a little complicated for what it is. As Peter said, it's not for points, so does it need to be this complicated?

You got what I meant at least And I agree of course, removing rules and resisting the temptation to add more rules should in my opinion always be a goal. My suggestion makes qualifying less complicated. Everyone just has to go as fast as possible to get the best grid position. Isn't that what qualifying is supposed to be about?

I made a bad mistake starting with a question. I should have just said this: My suggestion is everyone should be able to pick whatever tyre out of their allocation they want to start on.

[S griffin]

No need to tinker with quali, it's fine the way it is. They tried tinkering with it 2016 and what a disaster that turned out to be for all concerned

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Free choice of tyres in Q2 and Q3 means that only those teams who think they can make Q3 are likely to run.

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

This is not true. Q2 determines grid positions. Nothing would change. Why do you think it would?

Because if teams are still restricted to their weekend allocation, and they know that those teams in Q3 also have free choice for the race, then why waste a set getting there? They can save an extra set (or two) for race day, and then possibly try something different to the Q3 teams. Currently, it is the starting tyre rule that forces teams in Q3 to sometimes have a different compound to Q2 teams.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

And will always run with the fastest compound in Q2.

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

This is the case now. Because people have two objectives: get as far up the grid as possible and get into Q3.

The objective of the teams is not to qualify as high as possible - it is to be in the best possible situation for the start of the race. Sometimes this means sacrificing grid position for tyre strategy.

Currently, the fastest teams regularly try to get into Q3 with a slower compound because it provides the best race strategy. When they fail, as you have pointed out already, they stick on a softer tyre and the compounds are mixed up.
If you have a free choice for race, why even attempt to get through Q2 on a slower compound - especially if you want to save it for the race?

This is also a further reason why some teams may opt to sit out of Q2 - they know the top teams will stick on the fastest tyre. Currently, some teams hope to 'leapfrog' faster cars who are running a slower tyre in Q2 for race strategy purposes.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Then only the top 4 cars are likely to set a time in Q3.

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

I can't possibly imagine why that might be the case. I would love some clarification on this.

If you bothered to read what was written, you would see I explained this in the next sentence.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

This would make qualifying less important to teams, because they would be focussed on the race tyre options.

Teams only have a certain allocation of race tyres for the weekend. Once they have made Q3, and they know that they will start somewhere between P5 and P10, then they are already in a position where they are sacrificing grid position to the current top 2 (or sometimes 3) teams. Therefore, it would make sense to let the top teams take life out of a set of tyres (or 2 sets) and save your own to improve your race strategy.

In the discussion so far, the German GP has been cited as a reason why a free choice is a good thing. The cause of this may have been a wet Q, but the other factor was that the teams were not using their dry tyre allocation(s) to get through Q.

Implementing your proposal on a full dry weekend will just see teams adopt the strategy that gives them the most probability of not losing points. The current pecking order would be reinforced, not challenged.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Because if teams are still restricted to their weekend allocation, and they know that those teams in Q3 also have free choice for the race, then why waste a set getting there? They can save an extra set (or two) for race day, and then possibly try something different to the Q3 teams. Currently, it is the starting tyre rule that forces teams in Q3 to sometimes have a different compound to Q2 teams.

Actually it's the opposite. The rule right now forces every team to use the softest compound in Q2. Because they want to get through to Q3 or if they don't, have the best starting position. Once again, the objective for Q2 is to get through to Q3 and to get the highest place on the grid possible. That's qualifying. Currently there is nothing to be gained saving a set of tyres. They can still try something different to the Q3 teams if everyone has free choice. None of the midfield teams care about what the top 3 teams do. They're racing their direct competitors.

The objective of the teams is not to qualify as high as possible - it is to be in the best possible situation for the start of the race. Sometimes this means sacrificing grid position for tyre strategy. None of the other teams are even considering that. They just want to get both of their cars into Q3 ideally.

Currently, the fastest teams regularly try to get into Q3 with a slower compound because it provides the best race strategy. When they fail, as you have pointed out already, they stick on a softer tyre and the compounds are mixed up.
If you have a free choice for race, why even attempt to get through Q2 on a slower compound - especially if you want to save it for the race?

Your first sentence is complete nonsense. Grid position is insanely important for the race, especially for the mid pack teams. If it was the case as you said then most midfield teams would be gunning for the 11th spot. They aren't. All of them are trying to get into Q3 as much as possible. In fact the reality is again opposite to what you say: regularly midfield or lower teams sacrifice tyre life for an extra shot into Q3. And once again you're incorrect, the occassions where a top 3 team tries to get through Q2 on the harder tyre are rare, and if it happens it still doesn't matter. There are only 10 spots in Q3 anyway, 6 of those are reserved for the top 3 teams in a normal situation.

This is also a further reason why some teams may opt to sit out of Q2 - they know the top teams will stick on the fastest tyre. Currently, some teams hope to 'leapfrog' faster cars who are running a slower tyre in Q2 for race strategy purposes.

Except that, once again, this doesn't happen. If the 'faster' cars (that means the top 3 teams) are anywhere close to being under threat they bolt on a set of softer tyres and get through easily.

Teams only have a certain allocation of race tyres for the weekend. Once they have made Q3, and they know that they will start somewhere between P5 and P10, then they are already in a position where they are sacrificing grid position to the current top 2 (or sometimes 3) teams. Therefore, it would make sense to let the top teams take life out of a set of tyres (or 2 sets) and save your own to improve your race strategy.

Everybody who makes Q3 gets an extra set of tyres. Tyre allocation is not a problem in the race. This is not applicable. You seem to be under the impression that teams are somehow starved of tyres but that's not the case. And since teams can make their own allocation they can easily adapt to the circumstances. Tyre allocation is not an issue and it seems to be the core argument you're trying to make. It falls flat, I'm afraid.

Now I would like to ask you to perhaps reply to the points made in my original post, something you still haven't done.