Reverse order qualifying race

I with they would go back to single car qualifying but make reverse the order from the previous race results. So the winners have a much less likely chance of getting pole for two consecutive races.

 

Fast should be on pole. No gimmicks. This is a gimmick and will not provide better racing. Just the fastest 3 passing all the others. No different than a penalty or poor quali for a top 3 team car. No...................

 

I agree. "Overtakes" will skyrocket due to the top 3 teams passing everyone else.

 

First lap crashes will also skyrocket

 

If you know that the fastest car qualifying will start last, how do you motivate driver and team to put in their best effort in qualifying? It would then be to their advantage to "sandbag" the qualifying laps.

 

Bernie's wet track concept is preferable.
A more level playing field

 

F1 GPs are not run as handicap races.
The best qualifiers start from the front of the grid, and the best finishers get the most points. Period.

 

Coin toss after qualifying is over. .....Qualify at the back if you’re feeling lucky...


Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I proposed something like this:

The guy who gets pole gets the extra WDC points for doing it.

The top 6 cars have a random drawing. Everyone else the grid lines up in order of qualification.

The idea that the lead car is penalized for starting last makes no sense at all. There's lots of mid grid crashes that could take them out.

Random events happen all the time, such as the weather. Why can't the top 6 be randomly lined up to make the race more interesting. What's the harm if there is still a reward for Pole?

 

+1 and with F1 team finances in weak condition - not a bill many would like to see.

The reward for pole is no one in front of you.........

 

Excuse me... BS

The reward should be for the FANS, not the driver.

The reward for a fan is watching the pole position driver actually compete. These have become exhibitions, not competitions

We need to start thinking outside the box. It about entertainment. If its not entertaining no one will watch and then there is NOTHING.

 

The entertainment should be in the racing, if I may say, not in changing the rules to create artificially more action.
If a car, or a team is dominating, or winning more often, so be it; F1 is meritocracy by excellence.
People who want permanent thrill, overtakings each lap, constant wheel-to-wheel action, daring moves, contacts and so on, are watching the wrong series.
The other teams have to catch up the best (Mercedes, Red Bull and Ferrari), not being helped along the way with gimmicks.
The technical definition is so strict in F1 that cars and teams don't need to be artificially "equalised", IMO.

 

Tell MS or Senna and the rest of the 'greats' to yield pole after the work the team and driver have done. Gimmicks are for Formula E or Esports lol. Show up, compete and win or try again at the next circuit. When gimmicks are all in order, the series is dead or dying.

Webber said it best - Dont like MS winning?? Drive faster. Toto is correct to oppose this. Id be pleased to see Ferrari oppose this. The driver on pole is certainly competing is he not? There is pressure on pole even with the clear circuit ahead. Will he get a good start/a good line/ wheel spin/jump start/miss-judge turn 1 braking point.........and more.

 

Racing stops being racing when you gimmick it up with handicaps. Its about being fastest, period. If you want spectacle, at the end of each race let the winner behead the driver who comes in last. That will guarantee a constant flow of new talent into the sport.

 

Do you really want GOAT beheaded from a 1st lap wreck?

 

Another silly artifice. It’s truly sad that morons have taken over our sport.

 

I would really prefer two days race.

Race 1 (Saturday) - Maybe 70% actual race distance
Race 2 (Sunday) - Reverse grids with the same 70% actual race distance. The winner here starts the next race weekend on pole.

This way, we don't need too many race worldwide in different continents, and thus saving travel and logistic costs. At the same time, it potentially gives drivers in smaller teams/midfield teams to take the lead of races, and then, we can actually see how their racecraft is.

Problem with the current format of F1 is, it's just too bloody predictable. There's hardly any shocker unless there's rain. In football/boxing for example, there's always a 50% chance of both winning. Not in F1 unfortunately.

 

Let's put it this way, even gimmick laden NASCAR hasn't tried or discussed doing reverse order starting.

This, from the sanctioning body that has "phantom yellows", "competition yellows", "green-white-checker overtime",
"stage racing" and rather jagged enforcement of rules which are "set in stone" one day and then changed the
next.

Reverse order starting is an utterly absurd notion. Knock it off already.

BHW

 

Here's my gimmick approach to qualifing.

All the even positions (2, 4, 6, 8 and so on to 20) on the starting grid are filled with the top 10 finishers of the prior race. You then qualify for the odd positions. If you qualify better than your "even" position you move up and over and the rest of the even positions move up.

 

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/149767/wolff-explains-why-mercedes-blocked-reversedgrids

Mercedes Formula 1 boss Toto Wolff has explained the reasons why his team blocked a move to trial reversed-grid qualifying races this year - insisting the series doesn't need "gimmicks".

F1 team principals discussed the idea last week of running reversed-grid qualifying sprints at the second of double-header events this year as a way of making the repeat races more exciting.

But, despite a majority of teams being in favour of the move, Mercedes stood out and was not willing to accept the plan.

With F1 needing unanimous support to get the rules changed, momentum behind the plan has fallen away and the standard format will be used for the entire season.

Speaking to selected media on Wednesday during a video teleconference call, Wolff made clear that there were three clear reasons why Mercedes was not willing to accept the reversed-grid experiment.

PLUS: Why the reversed-grid proposal won't go away

"It seems to be a common pattern in Formula 1 that we're digging out old ideas that have been analysed previously and rejected," he said.

"Then somebody thinks it's great and it's back on the agenda.

"So you need to look at the reasons why we were against it, and there's three fundamental reasons.

"First, I believe that F1 is a meritocracy - best man in best machine wins.

"We don't need a gimmick to turn the field around to create more exciting racing.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

"Number two, I know it from touring car racing, that strategies become a very useful tool when one race result is basically making the grid for the next one.

"Just imagine one of the drivers not running well on the Sunday race of the first Spielberg weekend, and you decide to DNF the car - that will be the car that starts from pole for the quali race.

"And if that car starting on pole on the quali race is within midfielders, he will certainly be on pole for Sunday and win the race.

"There will be cars in the middle that will defend and block as much as they can.

"Therefore, for the quick cars coming from behind, it will mean more risk for a DNF and that could influence the championship.

"And then [third], from a pure performance standpoint, whoever the fastest car may be, and it's not necessarily us, will be penalised [compared to the] second and third quickest teams, because they will simply start in front.

"As we know, the margins are often not very large, so therefore it's a bit of an opportunistic move to give some teams an advantage."

While Red Bull team boss Christian Horner said it would be disappointing if F1 did not use the opportunity of the shaken up calendar to trial format experiments, Wolff is clear that even fans did not seem to want reversed grids.

"We said this is not the time to experiment with things that interestingly, didn't even have the support of Formula 1's fan community," Wolff said.

"In a survey only 15% expressed an interest in reversed grids."

 

Fully agree with that.

 

That lucky dude just turned 90.

 

So cool, one of my faves. What he was driving when he was in his late 80’s and it’s perfect for him. Fast enough and park it anywhere.
Fun story from TH about Clint.




Image Unavailable, Please Login