Sergio Perez, Force India, Albert Park, 2016

Teams forced to keep elimination qualifying

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: The elimination qualifying system will remain for at least the next race as teams were not given the choice to revert back to the previous system.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Were the drivers aiming at the 2017 car regulations with their letter on Wednesday?:

Apart from qualifying, last week’s race showed that F1 in terms of racing was in pretty good shape for 2016.

I think what the drivers are doing is trying to get a head of the game a little and have the rule makers focus on getting a coherent and sensible set of rules together for 2017.

So far the 2017 rule to me see like “more of the same” but with more aero which means we’re just going to see a procession of cars going a bit faster than this year. That is what the drivers are focussed on – so many good ideas and opportunities seemingly thrown aside in this great rush to get the 2017 rules out together.

If we could get rid of all of the vested interest compromises and have a single body bring down something sensible and workable things might improve but I’m not holding my breath and doubt the drivers are either.
DB-C90 (@Dbradock)

From the forum

Toyota TS050 LMP1, 2016
Toyota TS050 LMP1, 2016

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Guilherme Teixeira and Marc!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Karun Chandhok’s first outing for Lotus in a practice session did not go well on this day five years ago – he crashed his car at turn four in Melbourne on his first lap out of the pits.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 130 comments on “Teams forced to keep elimination qualifying”

    1. If we do go into Bahrain with qualifying unchanged I simply won’t bother watching. To be honest even if they only kept the elimination phase for Q1 I’d simply not watch Q1 & only turn on at about the time I’d expect the 1st non-elimination phase to start because I think the whole thing sucked!

      I know that some felt Q1 & even Q2 were not so bad but I felt that Q1 & Q2 were just as bad as Q3 was, They were just bad in a different way.

      The thing I loved about qualifying as it was was the way each segment built up into a crescendo where over the final 2-3 minutes you had a dozen cars on track all pushing to improve there times & the drivers in the drop zone could change a dozen times in the final few seconds as each driver crossed the line & I found that exciting in all 3 segments.

      At Melbourne in Q1 yes fine you had everyone out on track at he start but from then there was just no real excitement, No real tension & rather than building to a nice crescendo the session kind of fizzled out once the eliminations began & there wasn’t really anything to be that excited about over the final minutes. Q2 was the same but worse as you had no cars on track towards the end & Q3 played out again similar but even worse.

      1. I wont be watching qualifying either, if the teams, Bernie and FIA can’t be bothered then why on earth should I? I say that with a heavy heart.

      2. It is almost certain that I won’t be watching, and the most likely reason for that is the cost, although I might not have been able to because of my shifts. Either way, the only important thing is a grid is formed and the race starts on time.

      3. I will be watching the practice sessions on skysports as per usual, then using other methods to watch qualifying. I have too much interest in the sport to simply not watch.

      4. The idea of the new qualifying format is, quite frankly, to screw over the big name teams. It’s designed to deliberately make their chances of being at the front of the grid more difficult.

        The problem is, the big name teams have the budgets, the staff, and the outright performance, to out-flank the new rules, so ultimately, it’s going to be the mid-field teams that are the most screwed by the new qualifying format.

        The fact that Bob Fernley doesn’t get this speaks volumes about Force India.

        1. I certainly don’t know how Force India became the brain child of this matter. The repeated hammering of Force India on this particular issue highlights how certain people choose to have a warped view of issues. This qualifying farce is known to have been pushed by not just Force India but Williams as well as have been reported.
          The point is, there is no need to single out any particular team to flog on this issue since ALL the teams voted in support of this system.

          1. @tata – People are pointing to Force India because of stuff like this:

            “Pirelli and Force India both admitted at the Australian GP that they were not convinced about the need to abandon elimination qualifying entirely.”

            1. But it’s not just FI that said the new format should be dumped entirely.
              Some others have said since the new system has already been introduced maybe it should be tweaked and then given another chance instead of hurriedly dumping it. Teams, FOM/FIA and certain drivers have made such suggestions. Knee-jerk to me was the about-turn the teams were calling for immediately after qualifications last Saturday. Since they refused to listen to fans before the introduction, they might as well keep it. F1 is already downwards the way I see it.
              I read somewhere that the race on Sunday may have been spectacular due to elimination qualifying from the previous day which gave rise to a mixed up grid, especially after Merc and Ferrari. Of course one can argue against it but you can’t be too sure?
              Even your own post also mentions Pirelli as a proponent of such.

        2. I don’t believe the idea is purely to hamper the big teams, surely a large part of it is to provide the smaller teams with more air time. Usually during q1 and q2 we still spend most of the time watching the top cars circulate and that lack of airtime makes it almost impossible for the bottom teams to get even the slightest sponsorship money. I thought q1 and q2 went fairly succesfully (except for the mess ups by the teams), I also believe they should allow them to finish the lap that they’re on (like the end of the sessions), that way theres actually a chance of teams getting out in time if they’re suddenly finding themselves lower than expected

      5. I would watch it! I think it’s a little bit too early to say it’s complete rubbish. Just give it several tries. Adjust it, evolve it. I don’t want to get too philosophical, but change is part of life. So changing the qualifying format is an option to change an aspect of improving the spectacle. It maybe isn’t the best change, but hey, let’s be a bit patient. In the end, it’s about watching some relatively fast cars, which I do love, and we did have a decent race on sunday didn’t we? So, a mediocre qualifying (format) is in my opinion never a big deal.

        1. @krizz – “In the end, it’s about watching some relatively fast cars” – so why not sit by the side of a motorway?

          For me, F1 is about drama, excitement in the atmosphere, the feeling that anything can happen, the innovation, the bravery of the drivers, the noise, the feeling that I am watching something right on the cutting edge of what is possible technologically…

          Is any of that relevant now? Perhaps in the F1 meeting room but not on track!

          1. Well, dear petebaldwin,

            to reply to your first question:
            1) F1 cars are relatively faster, and they have to negotiate corners. Btw, I am also a fan of rally racing, ánd indycar, ánd the WEC ánd GP2 ánd GP3 ánd F3 ánd formula ford (rip) ánd DTM and so on, but I am not going to watch everything because a) I’m not addicted to it, that would be unhealthy, seriously, b) it would cost me too much time and money and c) there are other things in (weekend)life that I want to pursue.
            2) My job involves monitoring traffic, so don’t get too sarcastic!

            Your arguments about why you personally love/like F1 may be valid, but I wonder what your are doing here then? Since you have already suggested that none of your reasons are relevant on F1 weekends right now, why waste energy complaining about F1? There are probably other racing series that might interest you more.

            My explanation of your arguments using the Australian Grand Prix of last weekend:

            “F1 is about drama, excitement in the atmosphere, the feeling that anything can happen”:
            Both Mercedes messed up their starts, Ferrari probably messed up their own racestrategy, Raikkonen retired and flames came out of the airbox (#anything can happen), yet he remained calm and walked leisurely away from his car (ooh sorry, how predictable!);
            Alonso (arguably the BEST driver in the world) CRASHED, very likely by his own misjudgement ( Alonso, misjudging?! Don’t be silly! #anything can happen);
            the Renault-powered Red Bull was overtaking other cars(!) (I mean, seriously?!);
            Red Bull made positive remarks about the Renault PU (are they making up and getting remarried?! anything can happen);
            and last but not least: Haas scored point$ on their debut (despite their car being a pseudo-Ferrari, that’s still surprising considering the team is new).

            “the innovation”: they changed the qualifying format; the teams (have to) evolve/improve their car designs, the PU’s aren’t normal hybrids (okay, they became hybrids more than 10 years after the first hybrid Prius had seen daylight and, maybe, LMP1’s are better hybrid racing cars, so go watch WEC.)

            “the bravery of the drivers”:
            Verstappen’s car control, as a matter of fact, any driver being able to drive a car at such relatively high speeds around corners is brave!;
            Verstappen daring to moan against his team(mate) that ís brave, considering the fact that he’s got the privilege ánd the nurtured talent to drive an F1 car. I mean, there are enough other (probably unknown) talented drivers(Grow up Max and just race and be happy that you are in F!!)

            “the noise”: I still wouldn’t be able to sleep or study with the current engine sounds banging on my eardrums; besides, I think the engine sounds are OK.

            “the feeling that I am watching something right on the cutting edge of what is possible technologically…”:..go watch the WEC, for instance, it’s good

            Good friday to you!

            1. @krizz

              Yeah fair points. I watched GP2 before DRS infected it and catch WEC whenever I can. I used to watch Indycar but that’s hidden on channels I can’t justify paying for now.

              In regards to other series or reasons why I’m still here – it’s a fair question. I know what F1 can be and what it should be – it used to be discussed regularly between work colleagues, friends and family but if I mention F1 these days, everyone laughs and says “you still watch that!?” The only way to have any sort of conversation about F1 these days is on here with the others who are still living in some sort of hope that we might get our sport back once Bernie is gone.

              “Anything can happen” Ok you are right that things will happen in F1. Retirements and crashes will always happen – although I’ll admit that Haas scoring points was fairly impressive with or without Ferrari’s help. I’m more referring to the overall picture though.
              2007: 4 drivers won, 2 teams won.
              2008: 7 drivers won, 5 teams won.
              2009: 6 drivers won, 3 teams won.
              2010: 5 drivers won, 3 teams won.
              2011: 5 drivers won, 3 teams won.
              2012: 8 drivers won, 5 teams won.
              2013: 5 drivers won, 4 teams won.
              Then we got new engines…..
              2014 3 drivers won, 2 teams won.
              2015 3 drivers won, 2 teams won.
              2016 Are we expecting anyone other than Hamilton, Rosberg or Vettel (when Mercedes have a bad day) to win anything this year? Are we in a position where we could ever expect 5 different teams to win like in 2012 where 5 different teams won the first 5 races and 7 different drivers won the first 7 races? Is that still a possibility?

              “Innovation” – As you said really… They have to improve their cars each year but beyond that, there is only really room for F1’s suppliers to be innovative.

              “Bravery” – What I’m getting at here is that in the past, drivers had to be wary of the limits because they would have had a crash like Alonso’s – remember Australia is an old track with walls and gravel. They knew that pushing too hard would equal trouble whereas on most carpark tracks, pushing too hard just means you go wide with no penalty. Drivers go at it 100%, brake too late and then rein it in to find the limits now rather than pushing harder each lap and hoping the car sticks.

              “noise” – it’s a subjective thing depending on what you like. Lots of adverts still use the old engine sound and whenever I hear it, I immediately sit up and look. The new engines sound OK but I don’t think they sound unique anymore.

              “the feeling that I am watching something right on the cutting edge of what is possible technologically…” – I agree and as above, have been when possible but the long races make it difficult with other commitments (and with F1 deliberately booking races at the same time as Le Mans, for example)

              I suppose the main thing is that whilst there are lots of other series I can watch instead of F1, that doesn’t solve the huge F1 shaped hole I’ll be left with. If I wasn’t irrationally tied to F1, I’d have left a long time ago with everyone else…

      6. Me either, stuff it. I’ll come read Keith’s excellent review, that’ll do me.

        1. @petebaldwin. Good reply, this is getting more interesting!

          Funny you mentioned the past F1 seasons starting from ’07 onwards. It’s the year I started to follow F1 and become a fan of car racing in general.

          About that hole in your car racing heart: try to say to yourself not to worry about it too much, unless you can really do something about it, i.e. you can change F1 like you were Bernie, Jean or the F1 Board. Worrying about it will only make us people feel down for no good reason. There are enough other nice and rewarding things we can do/enjoy/spend our energy on that are just around the corner. Okay, enough psycho-philosophical shwizz from me, because I’m not officially qualified to do that! On the otherhand, if you´re feeling nostalgic (which isn’t a bad thing to a certain extent), I may have an advice that you might want to try: I sometimes try to find and watch replays of F1 races and qualifying sessions(!) of the 2004 and 2005 seasons on the internet (usually in winter, since there are no/few car races). Although the races were won by few different drivers, I still enjoy them: it’s just the speed of the cars and the sound (I do think the V10’s sounded great, but the current V6’s aren’t bad at all) and some classic tracks (you’re definitely right about that) like Imola, the “old” Silverstone. I recently watched part of a replay of the 2004 Monaco GP: surprising winner, great track (it really does justice to the high speeds/acceleration a formula car is capable of), so great race overall (despite the usual relatively few overtaking manoeuvres).

          The reason why I’m still watching F1: sometimes because it feels compulsory (okay haha, now it’s getting pathological!), I like the non-spec car formula idea and the cars are still relatively fast, especially through the corners, albeit maybe less compared to previous years and maybe other car racing series(which?), I admit. I think the average F1 cars are still faster around Spa and Silverstone, Bahrain, Shanghai than the fastest LMP1, but correct me if I’m wrong. The races are also not thát long (same argument as yours).

          I think Indycar is the best alternative to F1: fast cars, semi-spec, engines are allowed to be developed to a certain extent and during certain periods as far as I understand. The tracks are great I think (large and small ovals, road and street courses, permanent tracks) with relatively few runoff areas (that’s what you meant Max Chilton, right?). I think the Americans are good at creating a great atmosphere around the racing weekends (I’ve never been to one of them in real life, but even when watching from a screen, I can smell the atmosphere, so to say. Okay, now I’m getting weird again) Moreover, the Americans don’t do online pogroms to delete full-race replays from individuals, which makes it relatively easy to find good replays on youtube for instance, one or two days after the race took place (so that I can do other things during the weekend and sleep normally for instance).

          Btw great to read about your motives and so on!

          Have a nice Easter!

        2. I’ll come read Keith’s excellent review

          Great, now I’ll have to watch it… :-)

      7. Exactly. I vote that the headline be changed to “Fans forced to stop watching qualifying”. It’s essentially the same thing, but gets to the crux of the matter here, as without fans there can be no sport.

      8. Nothing from elimination qualifying should be kept as every element of it was dreadful, that includes Q1 and Q2. I cannot find one positive from it all. If they keep Q1 and Q2 as elimination people will simply switch off for Q3 as well. The only reason for keeping any part of it is to save face, and it’s absolutely embarrassing for the sport.

        How blind must Bernie, Todt and the rest be?

      9. Well, not that my opinion has ever mattered to Bernie or the others in charge of F1 rules, but my wife and I just talked it over and have decided to skip Qualifying all together.

        The race is still up in the air – thanks to the NBCSN commentators, we didn’t enjoy the Australian GP much and have doubts as to the rest of the season.

    2. Why not simply include the letter in full?
      Here’s the letter for those who still haven’t read it:

      Dear Gentlemen,

      I am not sure if this is the right description. It is not always easy to agree with you but you are correct in stating that the decision making process in the sport is obsolete and ill structured.

      We must as you have stated urge the owners and all the stakeholders of Formula 1 to consider restructuring its own governance.

      It is easy to analyse what is wrong so why not think and come back on this. At least it is better to think before you wish.

      I have been in Formula 1 for nearly 50 years in an active role and another 18 involved in some way. You state that every individual acts with the very best intentions. I am not sure if this is a misprint. If not, it should read “with their very best intentions.

      Best wishes


      1. Bernie just saying that F1 need to be restructured and it’s about time that team owner put aside their own agenda for better decision making process.

        @biggsy please never post anything that made Bernie look sensible here…

      2. What a boss Bernie is. He’s able to bowl in agreement without losing his footing. GPDA got schooled by the old timer, anyway it’s a win-win. GPDA make public outcry, Bernie gets his view out falling from the sky, having no need to stir the pot himself and even acting as the healer.
        Bernie has lost his stranglehold some half decade ago, and I’m not ashamed to say for the past 5 years that Rome needs their dictator back.

        1. Never, ever take what Bernie says as on the level.

      3. “ are correct in stating that the decision making process in the sport is obsolete and ill structured.” – Bernie

        I quite frankly find it remarkable that Bernie agrees with drivers who are suggesting that he is the cause of the turmoil the sport is in. If he truly agrees with them, all he needs is to withdraw himself at least from major decision making processes in the sport as no one wants to read letters from Bernie. I wonder if he has thought of that.
        His letter in reply to the drivers’ wish to have him reduce his influence over the sport makes one wonder.
        I don’t understand how he can “agree” with people who emphatically said the decision making process in the sport is obsolete. And then goes about writing a letter. First thing he should have done is MOVE aside. And after that maybe one can read his letter or whatever he has to say.

        1. What Bernie means is that he would like to be in control (maybe with a nominal role for Todt, provided he just rubberstamps what BE comes up with).

          Bernie sees this (and the EU investigation) to cut back the power of the teams in the “stragegy working group”, and if in any way possible cut their share of the money too.

      4. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
        25th March 2016, 10:35

        Signed WilliamB

        Here’s a thought: ePetition?

    3. I feel tempted to leave a single *sigh* as a comment, but I felt something so short may not get through as a comment, so here are some words around it.

      Seriously though, the most positive thing in this round-up is a broken turbo and a car from another racing series.

    4. So we get a new qualifying system to add unpredictability to qualifying, then revert it for the one part of the grid that needs the unpredictability the most…

      Just scrap the whole thing, please.

      1. Richard E Haugh
        25th March 2016, 3:33

        we all know the only team who wanted this crap qualifying to stay was Force India so blame them for the fact they didnt get the 100% vote to approve the change

        1. “We all know”

          I didn’t know this

          1. @strontium, it is being reported by Adam Cooper on his personal blog that the hybrid qualifying suggestion (the elimination format for the first two sessions and a conventional shootout for the final part) was originally a joint proposal by Force India and Williams.

            According to Adam, Todt originally didn’t support that particular proposal – Force India and Williams basically talked Todt into supporting the proposal just before they then dropped it themselves after coming under pressure from the other teams. If they hadn’t pushed that suggestion in the first place, we probably would be using the old qualifying system for Bahrain instead…

      2. we won’t get anything new, as the teams were given the option to choose/vote between either the format exactly like it was used in Melbourne, or with the change that Q3 would be run as it was @kanil. They were not given the option to revert it completely.

        1. … and I’m saying they should be given that option…

    5. As I understand it, the *main* problem with F1 is the inability to follow another car because of aero issues. Its not tyres, quiet engines, qually, radio talk, lack of social media, lack of FTA TV, etc Get the car able to follow other cars closely and no one will care about the rest much. People will even be willing to pay the Murdoch tax is the racing is good.

      So, why do the powers that be insist on doing literally anything other than sort out the aero issues?

      How many teams? With how many aerodynamics? And not one single one of them can figure this out? Really? I mean, really? Its there a bigger collective group of highly talented aero guys on the planet? And still cars cant closely follow each other?

      Instead we have to sod around with every other single thing, including inventing the ridiculous DRS, rather than deal with the core problem.


      1. People will even be willing to pay the Murdoch tax if the racing is good.

        Speak for yourself

        1. Duncan Snowden
          25th March 2016, 11:50

          Indeed. I completely agree about the aero issues, but solving them won’t solve the problem of locking F1 behind a paywall. The issue there isn’t really about us, the current fans losing a free ride; it’s about discoverability for future fans, and the financial independence of the teams through their attractiveness to sponsors. Yes, it’s annoying that we’ll lose FTA coverage, but the tragedy of it is the slow-motion destruction of the sport.

      2. “People will even be willing to pay the Murdoch tax is the racing is good.”

        Have to say on this one point, I certainly wouldn’t pay a penny to Murdoch, and I know a lot of other people who are the same. It doesn’t matter how good the racing is, a lot of people simply cannot afford this cost.

      3. cars always lose aero when following closely. this hasnt been a major issue UNTIL the cheese tires were introduced.

        Tires are why we cannot follow closely. These tires overhead and fall out of the operating window the second they are asked to perform a little harder (aka following closely).

        You’ll never fix dirty air – on top of that, designers ALWAYS design cars hard to follow – what you can give the drivers though, are tires that can be pushed when they want need it.

      4. “..the *main* problem with F1 is the inability to follow another car because of aero issues.”

        While watching last Sunday’s GP, it occurred to me that Torro Rosso’s 2016 car might have a load of dirty air, perhaps much more than others, hence the difficulty in getting past them.
        Without the two cars being called into the pits, I doubt Hamilton would have gotten past any of them. His 4th lap pass on Massa was well timed and executed including the one on DR but he just couldn’t get close enough to either of the TRs.
        And then we saw Max V follow his team mate around the track, cursing, swearing and all that simply because he could not pass. Even though I am still on the fence regarding the young man, one thing he has shown since he came into F1 is a good set of skills.
        Carlos swept past Palmer and within a few corners Max did the same but still he could not get past the other TR even with the pace he displayed last Sunday.
        So I am wondering if both TRs have been designed to make passing them hard for the following car. If I recall, they were some of the few cars that were not overtaken in that race.
        I have decided to wait until Bahrain to know if this is the case.

        1. **So I am wondering if both TRs have been designed to make passing them hard for the following car.

          I meant to say: Have their aero development which has given them a well planted and fast 2016 car led to a machinery that leaves a lot of dirty air in its wake?

        2. The Toro Rossos were among the slowest cars in the speed traps, so I guess they were running a lot of downforce, which may create a lot of dirty air. Also because of their high-downforce setup they had great exit speeds, so it was difficult for everyone to get in their slipstream. Anyway, Albert Park is probably one of the worst tracks for overtaking with those short straights.

          1. Not sure that any one team can create way more turbulence than any other given the regs. These cars aren’t that drastically different from each other. Last year the Mercs couldn’t get by each other.

          2. – The Toro Rossos were among the slowest cars in the speed traps..

            That’s quite interesting cos I thought their straight line speed was competitive. It adds to explain the massive amount of time Hamilton lost following them.

        3. I believe “dirty air” is specifically designed into the aero package to stop other cars getting close or to destroy the car behinds tire’s. Last season was the prime example of this where nearly every race was won or lost in the first corner. I know a major aero rule change would have to be unanimously voted for by all teams, and the leading team won’t want to get rid of that sort of advantage. It’s starting to look like we need a new open wheel series where racing is first and foremost.

          1. I don’t know if dirty air ”is specifically designed into the aero package to stop other cars getting close or to destroy the car behinds tire’s.” I just think it is an unwarranted consequence of the overall aero package of a vehicle. But it seems to have gotten worse in recent years.
            As @f1infigures points out above, in some cases depending on the track layout as we saw in Melbourne, the TRs might have ran a lot more downforce in Oz.
            The Mercedes certainly did not have issues getting past the cars last year of course due to their power advantage but with many cars having made huge strides in power unit and aero development in 2016, Mercedes’ engine and aero power might not be as effective in 2016 as it was in the last 2 years.

      5. Let’s be honest, we’re well past the point where F1 has a “main problem”. These days, the main problem is F1 itself.

      6. I fully agree with you, but remember that those aero guys also spend just as much time making the cars hard to follow to disrupt the guy behind :)

    6. Farcical Comedy of Qualifying Chapter 2 all set for Bahrain. Think I’ll make some popcorn, prepare some beverages and have a party! It will be so much fun. Can’t wait to hear the announcers try to explain what’s happening. He’s just set the fastest time in sectors 1 and 2, looking good in sector 3, NO!, sorry, that lap doesn’t count. Yes, this is why we watch F1…

      All I can say to all the teams and drivers is to crowd your way onto the track before the eliminations start and set the fastest lap of your life, it’s the only sure chance you’ve got.

      1. Other than the first five minutes, it’s exceptionally easy for the commentators to explain this new qualifying system.

        “He’s getting out of the car… And now so is he. And so’s he. And him, too. And now they’re all out of their cars, with five minutes to go. Four minutes and fifty nine. Four minutes and fifty eight. Four minutes and…”

    7. Someone needs to tell the three major LMP1 constructors that there are other colors besides black, white, and red.

        1. In fairness, none of the LMP1 runners has used any colour other than those three since Peugeot. I believe there are cars on the 2016 F1 grid employing other colours.

          That said, the LMP1 runners would probably reply the same as Haas: “These are our company colours, what’s everyone else’s excuse?”

    8. I’m no fan of the new qualifying format and would ideally see the 2015 format return, but if they’re so set on keeping an elimination element I have a suggestion.

      Q1, Q2 & Q3 set at 18, 15 & 12 minutes respectively. Eliminate 3 drivers after 5/6 minutes in each and eliminate another 3 at the flag. This removes 6 drivers in Q1 & Q2 and leaves 10 for Q3.

      It forces every driver to put in a lap in the opening few minutes and there’s no second chance if they make a mistake. There’s 3 chances for the top drivers to be caught out by 1 poor lap so mixed up grids are very possible without destroying the integrity of qualifying. Having 3 drivers drop out at the flag also keeps the crescendo as at least 6 drivers will be in danger and have 7 – 13 minutes to respond, hence those 6 will be on track.

      As an example, last week both Rosberg & Vettel messed up their first lap in Q1 and under this system could’ve been at the back of the grid.

      1. @f1-addict – No fan of the new format either, but your proposal makes a lot more sense than the hot mess that we have now. At least with your idea there is a realistic target to shoot for rather than a somewhat random elimination.

    9. Hopefully they’ll go for the modified version at least, it sounds marginally better.

      But it shows how badly Bernie is abusing his power, giving them the choice of random grids or elimination qualifying. No respect for the vile man.

      1. Random grids could be even more funny than q3 last time around, obviously I could laugh after crying ever since I accepted it was never going to change back. Q3 was an embarrassing albeit predictable debacle, somebody clearly thinks that that debacle sprawled from defiance via the top teams rather than being the most logical scenario. The random grid scenario is a bluff as nobody would put miles on their cars for no apparent reason.

        1. We may as well just scrap Saturday all together then and just have a lottery system.

      2. The problem with accepting the modified version is that we would probably then be stuck with it for the rest of the season. The new qualifying is so unpopular that at least this way there will continue to be a lot of pressure to revert back to the 2015 qualifying.

        I would rather have another race (or a couple if necessary) with this awful system if it means in the end we get back to last years system, than accept a botched version that only tries to hide the flaws of the new system by reverting just Q3.

    10. “Teams were presented with two options: to retain the rules used in Melbourne that proved so unpopular; or stick with the elimination format for the first two sessions of qualifying but with an extra minute’s duration, followed by a final qualifying session run as it had been in 2015.”
      Who presents these options, and why wasn’t reverting back to normal qualifying included as an option? I thought that is what all the team bosses agreed to at the emergency meeting in Melbourne. I am absolutely stunned at the ineptitude being shown here, and I can’t help but hope that qually in Bahrain is an even huger embarrassment.

      1. I think its either Bernie or Todt that prepares what they vote on @schooner.

      2. Exactly what I was wondering, it’s insane.

        If I were the teams I would genuinely consider agreeing to treat the last 20 minutes of FP3 as qualifying, and then just all decide to sit out of qualifying completely.

      3. This was from an F1 commission meeting. (“The F1 Commission features Ecclestone and representatives of all the teams, governing body the FIA, tyre supplier Pirelli, sponsors and circuits”)

        Dropping the new qualifying format weren’t unamimously agreed upon by the commission and as all know the commission didn’t come up with the suggestions by itself, this was in reality Ecclestone.

    11. I think we should have elimination qualifying when it’s only on Sky, and proper qualifying when it’s on Channel 4.

    12. As long as I can still follow F1 via illegal streams, I’m alright. But that’s a weak link already…

      And not that I have much interest in waking up at 2 am to watch a sport selfdestruct so quickly, anyway…

      1. at least you won’t have to bother with that on saturdays anymore now @fer-no65. I am pretty much in the same boat.

    13. It would be so easy to fix the flippin qualy. Just give Them tyres!
      But no…..

    14. Kimi might still have 4 PU’s left for the season, but surely one of them is now missing a turbo.

    15. One week into the season and i’ve already had enough of the politics, posturing and farce.
      I just want to see cars on track driving fast. If you want me, i’ll be in my room with my old Scalextric.

    16. Is the qualifying format fiasco all a distraction because they are doing something much worse that they don’t want anyone to notice? What else explains such smart people doing such stupid things?

      1. Like, Ecclestone having motive to scuttle F1 to create an F1 Mark II where Bernie gets all income not received by teams? If that’s not what this is, it sure looks like what’s being attempted…

    17. Neil (@neilosjames)
      25th March 2016, 2:21

      I favour having a special qualifying session for each country. They could have had a kangaroo race to decide the grid in Australia, sandsurfing in Bahrain, Panda-fighting in China…

    18. Who is “they” that are dictating idiocy? I do not read that in the article… this is maddening!

    19. I had no problem with how qualifying was and think the new format is rubbish. But if we must make a change for the sake of making a change, what’s wrong with single lap qualifying? It’s high pressure, do the absolute best lap you can when it counts and mistakes are punished. Will even mix up the grid from time to time.

      1. @eoin16 A decent rehash that is certain to deliver what they want.
        Another suggestion is qualifying on race fuel, that made “trulli railroads” famous.

      2. Peppermint-Lemon (@)
        25th March 2016, 8:12

        I agree.

        I emailed Charlie Whiting and suggested single lap quali… He replied saying that people found it too boring and he won’t even consider it.

      3. @eoin16 “what’s wrong with single lap qualifying?”

        F1 tried that from 2003-2005 & it was universally unpopular which is why the format changed 4 times in those 3 years as they tried to find a single lap format that was in some way popular. When they realized it just was never going to work mid way through 2005 the knockout system we had until this year was proposed & later adopted.

        As I’ve said before the TV figures for the qualifying sessions those 3 years were really low because fans were simply not tuning in to watch a format which the majority of them ultimately felt was dull to watch.

        1. Point taken. Dull equals lower viewership. I’m still trying to figure out what upside to this experiment they deem worthy to continue for the first two sessions. To me even if it scrambled up the grid a bit, it’s just another asterisk. A tweak to it is still only a side-step to the previous gen, no?

        2. I totally agree with with you @gt-racer I am just thinking of different ideas…what about going back to the one hour sessions with each driver given 12 laps? But instead of drivers waiting for the track to clean up for the first 20-25 mins, the session is broken up into 15 minute block whereby if you haven’t set a time in the first 15 mins you now only have 9 laps for qualifying. I know tire allocations would have to be looked at but it would certainly build up to a crescendo at the end and cars would be running throughout the hour.
          Like I said though, just throwing ideas out there for the fun of it

    20. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      25th March 2016, 3:44

      Just curious is there a chance card that gives a team Unlimited Engine Tokens or Pole Position for the season? Each team would draw a Monopoly chance card which would affect everything and make the game more exciting and haphazard. There should be some nasty cards like “No more than 1 Pit Stop allowed” or “Radio Blackout”. Wait they’ve done the last one:-)

      1. Apparently Bernie is immune to the “Go directly to jail” card ;-)

    21. I dont understand why they wont return to Single Qualifying lap if they really want to mix up the grid with out all this farce and further confusion. A Single Qualifying session which we had in past but slight changes to who will go out first and next. The Aggregate of FP1/2/3 positions will give the order and the least aggregate positioned car will go first . The least aggregate positioned car which will be more often than not will be the fastest car will start 1st with less Rubbered in track so that Teams wont go slow or stay in garage so that they can go last with rubbered in track. The only lap will mean more pressure on drivers. Every car will be able to get enough coverage and will be understood easily by fans.
      But no They want more confusion more complexity and less fans

      1. “I dont understand why they wont return to Single Qualifying lap if they really want to mix up the grid”

        See my comment above.

        1. But it’s pretty much single lap qualifying for all the other teams, but the top 3.

      2. I am in favor of the 12-lap format.

    22. Wow I love a dictator but wow, a fake democracy is even worse. Again I say it, if f1 really wants to make Sunday’s different then tweak Sundays. To tweak Saturday and not end with a gimmicky qualifying F1 would need to manufacturer a true compromise, a dichotomy, either go for race pace or qualifying, as at the moment either will result on a predictable form from Saturday to Sunday, anyway, I’m fine with natural racing and worthy winning…
      I suggest one tweak. For instances if you could only choose 1 or a tier of compounds (us,ss, soft or medium/Hard) for use in either qualifying or race, you could get into a situation whereby a team goes for a soft tyre for track position and pace even if that isn’t the ideal race tyre. If that’s too extreme only allow teams to bring 2 compounds instead of the 3. Why? Hasn’t anyone notice what’s going to happen throughout the races of this season? Why Merc tested 60 odd sets of medium? The 3 compound change is a another safe net for top teams, everyone will start to nominate the desired qualifying first stint tyre and then use their only set of medium to see the race through as half the field already had planned for Melbourne.

      F1 could rehash some concepts perhaps go back to qualifying with race fuel, of course as it did on the refuelling days, as it would not work in the desired way if everyone was toppled up.

    23. Here is how I see this new system is a good concept in theory but the execution will never work in the curent world of Formula 1:
      On paper, having a car drop out every 1 minute, 30 seconds is exciting except for the fact that the cars need to an in-lap and an out-lap sandwiched around their quick lap, keeping in mind it is very rare for a tyre to give a car a faster lap on a second consecutive flying lap. In Australia, they were running roughly 1 minute 30 second laps. That’s 4 minutes, 30 seconds to get in one actual qualifying lap. And that’s not taking into account that not everyone leaves the pit lane the instant a Q session starts. So let’s say you get in one lap and get a tyre change after (generously) 5 minutes. You would then have 30 seconds (generously) to get back out and ensure that you are not going to be P22 and hope to God you are not stuck in traffic (you likely will be). Now think how this system will work in Spa, where the lap time is around 1 minute 52 seconds.
      If you consider all of the above, the system would be ideal if everyone were just out on the track doing lap after lap without pitting, without factoring in fuel weight, and the tyres somehow lasted several laps. But in reality, you go out and set a time and then essentially the bottom 5-6 cars are done. And that goes for Q1, Q2 and Q3. Then, if you have survived, you go out one more time and the session is over. There is no strategy or added drama. You have just added another “mini” elimination period. Q.5, Q1.5, and Q2.5 if you will. The problem in Australia was that after “Q2.5”, the remaining teams didn’t really have time to execute another lap after they already knew their positions.
      Now add in the factor that saving tyres for race day is paramont to gaining one or two spots up the grid and you have what we saw in Australia and what we will see again in Bahrain.

      I’ve said it before here and I will say it again: Let them go out and set the ultimate lap time. Get rid of Parc Ferme rules and let them tune the care seperatly for Saturdays and Sundays. Under those rules, the best qualifying car on the grid is often not the best race car on Sunday because the engineering of those two seperate days is very different. Then you have a slightly “mixed up” grid that is not set with the exact cars that you will be racing with.

    24. He gave the teams two options:
      adopt the new elimination format;
      or keep the 2015 arrangement and have the top eight re-ordered afterwards, moving the fastest cars backwards on the grid.

      What kind of sick joke is this??? Why on earth can’t that lunatic just admit he was wrong and return to a qualifying format that has been absolutely fine and accepted by all the different stakeholders of the sport?

      I feel like I’ve had enough of this sport recently. I don’t care about 2017 regulations and what they have planned for the future. As long as Bernie is at the helm, we can rest assured that the sport’s condition will only further deteriorate up until drivers and teams decide to boycott it and start their own parallel series

      1. that was the option they were given at the start of the year when the teams chose for the lesser evil that we saw in “action” in Melboure @todfod. Now they were just given the option of keeping that or doing a minor tweak to allow Q3 as was in 2015

      2. Soulore Solaris
        25th March 2016, 10:41

        Ecclestone is mentally unwell, delusional and megalomanical. motivated by greed and ambition and destroying the sport while everyone just watches with no-one showing enough courage to speak out against him. so sad.

        1. Yes. Ecclesiastical and Murdoch make a good team.

          F1 is repeatedly shooting themselves in the tyres, by stopping free to view and this boring qualifying.

          I got into f1 simply because it was on in my parents’ tv on BBC when I was a child. That’s at an end soon. Next generation – probably think ‘F1’ is an online swearing abbreviation.

    25. Pretty pathetic that Sky are trying to censor out the GPDA letter, as mentions.

      What do Sky hope to achieve? Apart from teaching us they’re not to be trusted as a full news source. Censorship is so short-sighted. It says all the wrong things about them.

      1. Peppermint-Lemon (@)
        25th March 2016, 12:23

        All news is carefully chosen for impact, agendas / vendettas, and money. More so these days than ever before. I take all news reports with a side dish of salt nowadays. People need their BS filters to be switched to maximum.

        1. Not everything is the same though. Not everything is bad. And why ‘these days’? It’s harder than ever to hide news, it’s just that now we more often know when they try I suppose, as we see here: what has Sky accomplished? Revealed their own lack of integrity while keeping the GPDA letter from more or less no-one.

    26. Bernie has to go. It’s getting beyond a joke…

    27. ColdFly F1 (@)
      25th March 2016, 9:32

      I think it is now time for all parties to show their hand. Especially, the GPDA after having said A should now say B.

      The GPDA should demand that the ‘musical chairs’ quali gets dumped in favour of the old format from Bahrein. If the FIA (or whoever can decide this) does not agree then the drivers should go on strike.
      And how much I hate striking by drivers, as they typically punish the fans more than the rule makers, it might work out this time. And it will be low impact anyway.
      The Drivers can announce the strike early via the GPDA to all fans and stakeholders.
      At the same time they announce that P3 will be used as a quali; a 1 hour qualification session for all cars.
      No driver will participate in the FIA quali session. No cars; Big statement.
      According to the rules the grid will be as per the outcome of P3!

      And on Sunday we can all enjoy the race as normal.

      PS – if a (non GPDA) driver decides to break ranks, then let him be a hero for the quali photoshoot, but probably be spit out by his colleagues and fans from that day onwards.

      1. Duncan Snowden
        25th March 2016, 12:03

        I’m similarly reluctant to endorse a drivers’ strike, but in the current situation it’s maybe not the worst idea ever. In a sense, it needn’t even be a drivers’ strike at all; I don’t imagine many of the teams kicking up too much of a fuss, given what they said in Melbourne. And, as you say, I think in this instance most fans would actually support it (bit of a bugger for those who’ve bought a ticket for Saturday, right enough, but there’s still FP3).

        Come on, GPDA, you know it makes sense…

      2. A brilliant plan with one problem – per the rules, the FIA is entitled to revoke the licenses of anyone participating in a protest using the sport as a platform. This includes protests about the sport in question. So there wouldn’t be a Bahrain Grand Prix, which would most likely collapse F1 and hand Bernie Ecclestone the I-can’t-believe-it’s-not-F1 he’s been trying for, way ahead of his plan’s timescale :(

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          25th March 2016, 15:10

          Nobody has to say it is a protest, @alianora-la-canta. They just foresee serious problems for quali ;-)

      3. I’d fully back the drivers in a protest over recent events @coldfly that’s for sure!

    28. Oh boy. What will they announce on April 1st?

      1. From next year the moon will host a grand prix curtesy of Bernie promoting the sport there.

      2. @tomsk That the elimination qualifying is set to remain, but it will now take place on F1 Race Stars as opposed to on the track.

    29. Soulore Solaris
      25th March 2016, 10:39

      Formula 1 is delving deeper into this self-imposed crisis. Again, it looks like the idiotic Ecclestone is the cause. This man is senile. It must be the only way to explain such stupidity. He’s here now brazenly talking about the new qualifying being kept for another race like its a good idea despite its deep unpopularity with fans, drivers, teams, media etc etc… How low will it all go… ? This on top of the greedy money grab of exclusive pay-per-view TV contracts the only ones who benefit is Murdoch, Ecclestone and CVC. Pathetic. Sponsors will drop off, fans will have much less access and drop off, still no vision or intelligence around other, more modern media options and the downward spiral continues. Ecclestone is in his 80s! so deeply out of touch and delusional with the whole sport enabling him by pandering to his control… sad.

      Please can we not just get rid of Ecclestone and CVC before its too late…

    30. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
      25th March 2016, 10:51

      And with that, for the first time since boycotting the 2005 French Grand Prix (in disgust of the events of Indianapolis), I will not be watching an F1 qualifying session. You don’t grow out of genetic disorders, and elimination qualifying is genetically flawed. Why are inherent issues most engineers spotted within fifteen minutes of publication not going to reoccur in Bahrain? Elimination qualifying fails not only to provide an entertaining spectacle, but entire intentional rationale behind it, to mix up the order, is premised on the ridiculous assertion that wheel-to-wheel racing can only occur when the faster cars lose track position to inherently slower cars.

      I am a big fan of Force India, and yes, a free tyre choice for those that start on the fifth row is a big advantage for them, but surely they can see the bigger picture here: a sport crumbling under the weight of apathy and self-interest.

      1. They can. I think they’re trying to do something about it (noting that the options were stick to known non-functional system or try something else) – and failed due to not convincing the others. It also seems like some confusion got in about what was being voted for (was “2015 qualifying”, that we were told was unanimously voted for, ever an option?), which doesn’t help anyone.

        F1 psuedopolitics is even more inane than real-life Westminster politics at the moment, and the latter has featured “your mum” jokes in the last fortnight!

        1. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
          25th March 2016, 12:51

          @alianora-la-canta – At least the strange, public-school-made-big we call our Parliament is at least accountable to some degree to British constituents. F1’s politics can be autocratic, dim-witted, self-interested and euphemistically well-intentioned, and there is not a jot of difference any fan can do about it. It’s not like Bernie cares that the name of his sport was dragged through the dust last Saturday, as it will be again next Saturday. It’s not like Bernie cares that he will lose fans over this.

          But, in a nutshell, here is the governance of the sport we love: last week Bernie described the new qualifying system as “pretty c!?p”, yesterday he took ownership of the plot to retain it. You start to wonder: how much money is Bernie’s crass, bigoted and corporate agenda costing CVC and Donald McKenzie.

          1. If my theory is correct (and I hope it is not), it’s going to cost CVC everything they’ve spent on F1.

            1. Cvc already got it all back and then some.

    31. There’s a big difference been a knee-jerk reaction and a decisive response. In many quarters, the team bosses were bring praised after qualifying for a decisive response to the fiasco by reverting to the old system.

      However, it seems now that since the drivers and other commentators have criticised the general governance of the sport as being “knee-jerk”, the strategy group are scared of being decisive, in fear of being accused of making yet another knee-jerk change even though nobody was actually complaining about the specific decision to switch qualifying back to the old system.

      The result is now that all key players are not prepared to be decisive anymore and we will be left with weeks of dithering about while they decide what to do…… Again. In the meantime we’ll have another crap qualifying session in Bahrain.

      I’ll keep saying this until I’m blue in the face but the only way elimination qualifying will work is if all lap times are deleted after each elimination, this will force the drivers to remain on track throughout the whole session. I am frankly amazed that nobody from the strategy group, FOM or the FIA has realised this. No……wait……actually, I’m not.

    32. Alex McFarlane
      25th March 2016, 11:10

      Just a quick question/poll:

      Who didn’t see this coming?

      1. Honestly….. I expected it to change at least slightly. Maybe just a few tweaks rather than going back to the 2015 format but I was sure they’d change something.

        If they keep these qualifying rules following the response from everyone involved in F1, I am done. Over the last few years I have spent a lot of time and money on F1 and in reality, all it does it stick two fingers up at me and the rest of us.

      2. Me. I had thought they’d at least wait until China before proposing something else (and then have a lack of unanimity prevent it from being actioned), having claimed to have voted through 2015 qualifying on Australia race morning.

    33. The new qualifying system is fundamentally flawed.

      As each session progresses, the bottom of the time sheet has an ever increasing number of drivers who are no longer allowed out on track as they have been eliminated, while the top of the time sheet has an ever increasing number of drivers whose positions are safe, leaving a dwindling number in the middle the only ones with any reason to run. This is always going to lead to fewer hot laps completed.

      In addition there will always be drivers eliminated in the pits (or on out or in laps) as whatever tweaks they make to the timing will never change the fact that the time is too short to turn around a car between runs. This situation will be even worse on longer tracks or in the wet.

      I think that the teams were correct to reject the hybrid version (new Q1 & Q2 plus old Q3), if they had agreed to this we would be stuck with it for the rest of the season. By refusing and continuing with the new one by one elimination system, the pressure to fix qualifying will continue to increase and hopefully will lead to a future vote on the only sensible option, to return to the 2015 qualifying system for the rest of the season.

    34. rockriverarms
      25th March 2016, 11:22

      The constant stream of negativity and farce surround F1 of late is making it tiring to be involved with it as a fan. The news of F1 moving behind a paywall in the UK is the final nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned.

      I’m out, not wasting anymore of my time with F1. I’ll check back in in 5 years or so and see what it’s like then if there is anyway to watch it without paying a huge amount of money to sky when i don’t want to access to anything else on sky.

      Hope maclaren sort it out and Alonso get’s another title before he jumps ship, hope button gets a few more wins and that Hamilton beats Vettels record.

      Best of luck to you F1.

    35. Well that’s a few hours on Saturday I have gained then! Absolutely no interest in watching cars sat in the pits.

      I have absolutely no doubt that this will be some sort of deliberate play by Bernie to ensure we’re stuck with what we have for a while – he can then push his ballast idea again as an “improvement”

    36. Seriously starting to think there is dark forces within F1 who are hell bent on its destruction.

    37. As much as I don’t like elimination-qualifying, or knock-outs for that matter, I think the following format would work;

      Q1 = 7 drivers knocked-out, so a 7-lap session, under race conditions (no blue flags), + 1 “out-lap.” At the end of each lap (not the out-lap), 1 driver is eliminated according to slowest lap-time. ALL TIMES are then RESET to “0,” and we go again. The process continues until 7 cars are eliminated. This then signals the end of Q1. Q2 follows the same format, as does Q3.

      Practicalities: EVERY DRIVER goes out on the “out-lap” together. Maybe we have 2 out-laps to give the field ample time to space themselves out/squabble, build tyre temps etc. As soon as the “lead-car” starts his 1st qualifying lap, the elimination process on a lap-by-lap basis starts. The slowest driver each lap is eliminated. Every driver who isn’t eliminated has their previous lap-time deleted, and REPEAT.

    38. I’m boycotting the Bahrain qualifying. I once thought F1 bosses are stupid. Now I think they’re brain-dead. Utterly without hope. Despair is what I feel right now

      This and the brainless move to pay tv at F1’s UK heartland might be the final straws that accelerate the inevitable death of F1 as we know it. Can’t come soon enough that day, for me

    39. It will actually be interesting.

      Will the teams and drivers boycott qualifying?
      If they participate, will they do anything differently than in Melbourne.

      I suspect we might see even more teams electing to stay in the garage after 1 run and not bother waiting for the elimination countdown.

      I would so love to see Manor, Renault & Sauber get to the front of the queue in q1 and then block everyone else.

    40. I do like that there is conveniently a 24 Hour touring car race at Silverstone starting at exactly the same time as the Bahrain qualifying… (And yes, it is being livestreamed!)

      If this qualifying mess has done one thing, it has made it very loud and very clear to everybody around the world that F1 is well and truly in a mess right now, and through its own doing.

    41. I’m not greatly disappointed that qualifying hasn’t changed. We didn’t really get to see the new format in all its “glory” because quite a few teams didn’t read the rules and didn’t send their cars out early enough to complete laps. If something is going to be scrapped once-and-for-all then I’d much prefer to wait until it’s been given a proper run-out than only have a half-cocked effort. (I’m still frustrated by Nissan’s LMP1 withdrawal for that reason.)

      My verdict after Australia was that Q1 and Q2 were fine but that Q3 should revert to the way it was, so I was pleasantly surprised to see that as an option on the table. I have to say though that I find it satisfying hilarious that there was a unanimous agreement to do *something*, and yet the teams have managed to go into a room and come out with absolutely *nothing*.

    42. If the drivers are against the qualifying, which they seem to be, I truly hope they decide to take this decision away from Bernie and and the team bosses. All they need to do is agree that none of them will take part in the qualifying session in Bahrain, drivers have gone on strike before, it would make a strong statement and likely provide no difference in the qualifying results. If we have a qualifying as poor as Melbourne it will destroy the viewing figures on Saturday

    43. Lol. GPDA point out rule making structure is poor.

      Next day… Qualifying rules will be retained… Despite overwhelming call to abandon current format.

      What else… Drivers want change, teams want change, FIA wants change, FOM wants change… Why wont change happen?

      Rule making process is totaly retarded. Unless pretty much all agree with a purposal it does not get done. Inseason rules can only happen with 100% support.

      How does strategy group opperate? Has anyone researched and blooged the entire process, from good idea to writen in rulebook.

      It seems to me like drivers have good ideas, Pat Symonds has good ideas, why does stuff not get done? Bernie is crying for change.. How is voting done?

    44. They will be a lot of problems.

    45. I’ve got a feeling of disappointment even before watching it. Feel sorry for the commentators who have to try to make something exciting out of a total farce.

      I’d feel embarrassed to recommend anyone to watch qualifying ATM.

      Are the people at the top mad?

    46. The new elimination qualifying is unfair!
      The slowest 3 drivers have only 1 lap and it will be more worse in a long track such as Spa.
      What happen if is it rain? If is it red flag? If keep drivers each other from fast lap?
      Come back the last year qualifying system + more tyres for weekend especially for qualifying!

    47. There was a time in f1 that the drivers had 1 hour and 12 laps each to get their fastest lap.
      That means 4 tries each.
      The result was that the tv cameras were almost always showing entire fast laps of 1 or 2 cars simultaneously on track and not 2-3 fast turns because of the trafiic.
      Also the teams could start with whichever tyre and fuel load they wanted, making race strategy an art.
      The result was interesting races till the end as you didn’t know when and if a pit stop was coming.
      Of course there weren’t stupid things like DRS.
      If you are faster, you pass.
      Simple as that.
      In the end it is the simple things that are the most difficult and beatiful to master.

    48. Seriously. This is a joke. No?

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
    If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.