Fans asked to vote on qualifying (merged)

[Kicking-back]

So, the teams have come up with two proposals for 2006 qualifying:

Originally Posted by Autosport.com

Both proposals consist of a 60-minute session, the first split in two halves of 25 minutes with a 10-minute break in between. Drivers would be allowed to run as many laps as they wish, but must set a time in each half. Each driver's best lap from each session would be then added up to produce a final time to determine the grid.

The second system also consists of an hour-long session, but after 15 minutes the five slowest cars must retire and will qualify 16th to 20th on the grid. After another 15 minutes, the five slowest cars during that period will also retire from the session and they will qualify 11th to 15th.

During the final 30 minutes, the remaining cars will compete for the top 10 positions, based on the best times set in that period.

Both systems include no fuel restrictions, with cars allowed to be refuelled during and after the session.

There's to be a vote on the F1.com website.

http://www.formula1.com/news/3312.html



I'm appalled by this.

I hope the FIA don't feel bound by the result of this poll.

They should come up with the rules - getting the punters involved generally results in bad decisions.

I'm all for market research, but if you had F1 as the fans wanted it, it would be disastrous.

[chillibowl]

both proposals seem pretty silly.
at least we may see cars running on low fuel again but not really sure how they plan on addressing in and out laps. too much traffic for us to see the cars go all out.
i voted for keeping the same system as this year.

[ralf fan]

IMO Both proposals are a complicated to the point of silliness (whatever that means )

[Kicking-back]

That's what happens when teams come up with ideas.

[Inigo Montoya]

Well, given the choice between the current system, and those two proposals, I had to go with Proposal 1. At the very least, it is not single lap, and does somewhat allow for changing weather conditions.

[ralf fan]

Proposal 1..... It is too complicated... most people had difficulties following the two session aggregate time at the start of the year.The proposal is just a more complicated version of the system we had at the start of the year.

Proposal 2... Why should cars be elminated? everyone should get a chance to set a time at the end of session when the track is at it's optimum and every one should get an equal oppurtunity to go the fastest they can... this is what qualifying is about (this is also a problem i have with the current system)...

A more sensible system would be to go back to the 2002 system but dividing the 1 hr into parts of 15 mins in which everyone has to set a time (failing to do so should lead to a penalty) thus avoiding the problem of having an empty track in the first half of qualifying.

Hence i havent voted....

[Gt_R]

Interesting that F1 allows fans to make the choice (although limited to 2 choices, neither which particularly exciting).

But both would be an improvement of the current qualifying that we have.

For show, i think the 2nd qualifying on paper looks interesting. This way, we have the top teams running 4 times more qual then their counterparts. I wonder if this should be done on race fuel and one set of tyres still... where teams would have to decide if tyre-wear/fuel load is worth sacrificing for qual position.

Hopefully, this would be the last time qualifying change in a long time.

[Logrence]

I prefer the 2nd system, it's more climactic, more exciting.

[Silk Cut Jaguar]

Just remove the fuel rule from the current qualifying system and I'd be happy.

[cos]

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

I hope the FIA don't feel bound by the result of this poll.

They should come up with the rules - getting the punters involved generally results in bad decisions.

I'm all for market research, but if you had F1 as the fans wanted it, it would be disastrous.

F1 as the fans want it... that would be more overtaking, more teams, less Tilke-rings, with more emphasis on driver skill (according to the FIA's recent survey) - how would that be "disastrous"?

I'd like a variation on proposal 2 - free-for-all qualifying but then a top-10 DTM-style Superpole one-lap shootout.

[Kicking-back]

Originally Posted by cos

F1 as the fans want it... that would be more overtaking, more teams, less Tilke-rings, with more emphasis on driver skill (according to the FIA's recent survey) - how would that be "disastrous"?

Those are objectives.

I'm talking about actual rules.

[cos]

It would be fairly simple... more races at tracks the fans want, scrap the $48m bond for new teams, standard ECU for all cars, standard brake discs to increase braking distances and overtaking; that kind of thing.

The FIA is good to listen to what the fans want - don't forget it's the fans that ultimately end up 'paying the bills' for F1.

[Raven]

I'm not keen on either proposal.

I'd go with #2 though.

[JeremySmith]

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

[djinvicta]

Hooray Jeremy; as it used to be, exciting.

[fastracer]

I feel both proposals are a bit silly. Aggregate qualifying already proved to be rather unpopular this season, so bringing it back would be a mistake. The second proposal seems interesting but would create problems with the current engine rules as teams would like to run as little as possible in order to preserve their engines. Whould a team push its car to run extra laps and possibly end up finishing 10th when they could bag it in during the previous session, thus saving their engine, and qualify 11th?

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by djinvicta

Hooray Jeremy; as it used to be, exciting.

djinvicta "Back to the Future"

[Dutton]

If a choice had to be made, then I would go for Proposal 1. It is hardly wonderful, but an improvement on what we have.

[djinvicta]

I do find this a weird situation. Why did they change from the original format? It was balls out, regulated by weather, slower cars, track temp etc. You never knew who would venture out at any one time and the last 5 minutes were a mini race that often produced the winner. It was equal for all.

[Dutton]

Well, you see, apparently we all found the waiting at the start unbearable and hated not being assured of seeing the pole lap and things. I was perfectly happy, including the wait at the start. The new format was always going to be bad, and it has proven to be so.

Anyway, I shall resist the urge to produce a reactionary diatribe.

Compromise is what is needed, and I think the Proposal 1, in the context of the options, does a good job of that.

[djinvicta]

Ok then; I do appreciate what you say; who complained about the original quali? Was it Paul Stoddart (note correct spelling) or EJ because their cars were not getting TV time? Sorry both proposals dont do a lot for me, 1 if I had to chose. I think it will not produce the tension needed as before.

[Dutton]

Well, I think one theory went that the littel guys would get more TV time. It has turned out the opposite way round for reasons that are well known (and logical).

Really I think, when it comes down to it, it was all changed as a reaction to Ferrari domination and the desperate urge of the powers that be to make things "exciting" - the promise of strange grids and so on etc. etc.

It basically wasn't very well thought through, or done for the right reasons. IMHO.

[Hazard]

Adding together times is hardly interesting...didn't 'view' too well early this year, but it was better than the mess we have now.

Option 2 is okay...it forces all the teams to put full effort into the first 15 minutes rather than saving it for the end. It seems like the old system slightly fixed to stop the 40 minute waits.

In fact, I'm starting to like it a bit. I'd really like to see it tried.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Dutton

Well, you see, apparently we all found the waiting at the start unbearable and hated not being assured of seeing the pole lap and things. I was perfectly happy, including the wait at the start. The new format was always going to be bad, and it has proven to be so.

Anyway, I shall resist the urge to produce a reactionary diatribe.

Compromise is what is needed, and I think the Proposal 1, in the context of the options, does a good job of that.

This is how I voted proposal 1. If we can not have the original format which I loved, except for having to wait, and that is SO easy to fix..then it seems the best compromise IMHO.

[BootsOntheSide]

Aggregate times could be okay under these circusmtances - the real complaint most people had this year was that they didn't know who was on pole overnight, and that the major TV networks didnt'/couldn't show the decisive session. Also, the idea put forward here is much easier to udnerstand and explain to new viewers, and much more logical in that the laptimes are set in differnet conditions, but the timing of the laps come down to skill (and a bit of luck). The long-life engines would cause teams to trade things off a bit - it culd be that top teams will only run 1 lap in each half of the session, while others might push it more to go for pole at the expense of extra engine wear (or saving fuel if that remains in place.

Option 2 would be interesting as well, although I can udnerstand why some would regard it as artificial. Still, it would ensure drivers going out early on, and would put pressure on the smaller teams (especially as in practice this year it would mean 1 competitive driver being eliminated alongside the Minardis and Jordans).