Valtteri Bottas, Mercedes, Bahrain International Circuit, 2019

Should Formula 1 add a ‘Q4’ session in 2020?

Debates and Polls

Posted on

| Written by

Plans to add a fourth round to qualifying in 2019 were first discussed last year. Although the proposal wasn’t approved, but it remained in consideration.

During the Bahrain Grand Prix weekend it emerged the plan is under discussion for implementation in the 2020 F1 season. The teams have been asked for their input and new rules could be signed off by the end of the month.

Under the proposed format, four drivers would be eliminated in the first three qualifying sessions, leaving eight drivers in Q4 fighting for pole position.

Would this be an improvement to the three-part system which – aside from F1’s unsuccessful flirtation with an ‘elimination; format in 2016 – has been unchanged for years?

For

Adding a fourth session in qualifying could increase the chance that a driver from the top teams may fail to advance to a later stage. The timings of each session would be tighter, reducing the chance for drivers to do multiple runs. This may add an element of unpredictability to qualifying and cause headaches for teams in terms of their tyre allocation.

Another potential bonus would see drivers who qualify ninth and tenth have a free choice of tyres which could help solve some the issues with the current Q3 tyre rule.

Against

The change in format could give the top teams an even larger advantage if they are able to save their softer tyres for Q4 while midfield teams could be forced to run on used tyres or a harder compound.

Adding a Q4 session would also cause problems with the current tyre allocation system. Some team principals have raised concerns that midfield teams could use all their fresh tyres just to reach Q4, and then be unable to run on new sets.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

I say

Christian Horner last week warned F1 must “make sure that we don’t just change for the sake of change”. I couldn’t agree more.

Adding Q4 to qualifying does offer some enticing possibilities, but the current format already provides plenty of excitement. The teams need to fix the real problems, like the Q3 tyre rule, and stop changing aspects of the sport with inadequate justification.



You say

Should Formula 1 add a ‘Q4’ session in 2020? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.

Do you agree F1 should add a 'Q4' session in 2020?

  • Strongly agree (2%)
  • Slightly agree (3%)
  • Neither agree nor disagree (4%)
  • Slightly disagree (17%)
  • Strongly disagree (73%)
  • No opinion (1%)

Total Voters: 331

Loading ... Loading ...

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

A RaceFans account is required in order to vote. If you do not have one, register an account here or read more about registering here. When this poll is closed the result will be displayed instead of the voting form.

Debates and polls

Browse all debates and polls

Author information

Josh Holland
USA-based Josh joined the RaceFans team in 2018. Josh helps produce our Formula 1 race weekend coverage, assists with our social media activities and...

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

Posted on Categories 2020 F1 season articles, Debates and PollsTags , , , ,

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

  • 88 comments on “Should Formula 1 add a ‘Q4’ session in 2020?”

    1. Kyle (@hammerheadgb)
      7th April 2019, 11:15

      Quali ain’t broke. Don’t fix it.

      1. +1
        Maybe a final one lap shoot out at the end of Q3 between the top 3 drivers would be exciting and also mean that their tyres would be in much worse condition than those behind on race day.
        ..But generally quali is great as it is

      2. Qualifying stresses the engines, why wear them out.

        1. Not just engines, but fans as well.

          If they must introduce Q4 or Q5, to reduce fan stress, why not skip the boring parts, Q1-Q2? Maybe F1 could get a fat sponsorship from Visa and Mastercard and the entire grid would be pre-qualified.

          1. Great idea @jimmi-cynic
            But we should keep Q1 and Q2.
            Maybe don’t eliminate any drivers, and hold them earlier in the weekend instead of free practice.

            1. That’s sounds more fair @coldfly

              F1’s obsession with qualifying first and finishing first is probably unhealthy anyhow. Corporate branding is sculpted to incite our inherent human tribalism fanned by the internet’s flame rooms.

              Perhaps it would be better if F1 blended more free-form interpretive art sessions into the sport – qualify where you want – finish where you want – points for everyone. Millions of them if need be.

              Savour the racecraft. Enjoy the show!

            2. So a MotoGP style of qualifying format using FP3 times to separate Q1(Not top 6 but fastest 2 entering top8 shootout for pole) and Q2(Top-6 with last 2 spots from fastest Q1 drivers) drivers.

      3. Quali ain’t broke. Don’t fix it.

        absolutely.

    2. Q4? Clearly an answer to a question no-one who watches F1 has ever asked.

      1. Its better to add 5 more minutes in Q3 than adding Q4. 15 minutes in Q3 at least can give driver more lap for fastest lap.

        1. FYI, Q3 today is already 12 mins (18/15/12 for the 3 sessions). It used to be 20/15/10, but 2 mins was moved from Q1 to Q3 for reasons similar to what you’ve mentioned.

      2. Indeed, and the only reason they want to add Q4 is to maybe catch a driver from a top team to slip up, like Gasly in Melbourne. But to be honest, is that really beneficial to the show in qualy? I mean, having a top car replaced with a midfielder in the last Qualy session means that the fight for pole will be less exciting. And in the race usually the top cars slice through the field with no real drama or entertainment in a few laps, so what exactly is the added benefit to Q4?

        What they should focus on changing is the core F1 problem (spending and rewards) which makes such a gap between top teams and midfield ones.

        1. Gasly “slipping through the field in a few laps” was quite entertaining :)

    3. Unless we get another 3 teams it’s pointless to change qualifying. Nearly all fans agree it works, it’s effective and it’s exciting at the moment. I don’t want to see qualifying getting longer than the race.

    4. There are quite a few elements of F1 that need improving/tweaking, but qualifying is pretty much perfect as it is.
      Over the past couple of seasons I have regularly enjoyed Saturdays Final practice and Qualy more than the actual race. I’m expecting that to change this season mainly due to the driver shake up, but Qualy is definitely the least broken part of the weekend in my opinion.
      Please leave it alone!

    5. if the top 4 were forced into a 1 lap shootout, it could work and put an extra lap + of wear on their race tyres which could spice the race… the running order could be dictated by the winner of Q3

    6. Just more of a gimmick.

      In Q1 and Q2 now we only see the front runners, and not the last 5. So what use are those Q1 and Q2 ?? It’s is not that Q1 and Q2 make it exiting.

      I prefer the old format Q1 on friday Q2 on saturday. Qualifying times re the average of the two.

    7. Robert McKay
      7th April 2019, 11:38

      Keep the same number of dropouts but add the Q4 session. The top 10 go into Q3, the top 5 in Q3 go into a Q4 reverse order one lap shootout for pole.

      Quali works well precisely up until Q3, because the main bulk of the field is much more unpredictable than the front of it, so throw some sort of a curveball for Ferrari/Mercedes/Red Bull to keep things interesting.

    8. No. Leave what is working well and always a good show (qualifying) and fix the race instead. Giving drivers more durable tyres which they push more and relaxing the 3 engine per season rule. Maybe give them 5 or 6 engines per season.

    9. In the last few years, the qualifying sessions are sometimes more entertaining than the races that follow. The format has never been better, in my opinion. To change it would be folly.

      1. @ferrox-glideh

        Well summarized. Leave qualifying alone.

    10. I am one of the few who said ‘slightly agree.’ I am quite indifferent, and would be absolutely fine if they left quali alone, but I just wonder if a Q4 would mean less down time where we sit around waiting for the cars to come out. With it a it is, we get everyone taking their time coming out for initial runs that usually turn out to be inadequate to advance, so then they all go back in and wait until nearer the end of the session to come out and do their ‘real’ runs. To me a Q4 would compress things more and make for more action during the hour and less sitting around waiting idly for the cars to come out in batches as they tend to do at the start and the end of each session, with little going on in the middle of each session.

      1. @robbie, I’m the other side of neutral from you for pretty much the same reasons, I like Q the way it is and doubt a Q4 would improve it but don’t see a Q4 as an unmitigated disaster that could not be reversed , and maybe, as you say it could lead to less empty track time. As has already been stated, “it ain’t broken, so why fix it”.

    11. I already feel like 3 is too many. Q1 is just about seeing if some of the top teams gets caught out by track conditions or someone makes a mistake. I don’t really care about it any more than that. Or if someone is fixing their car and hoping they get it fixed in time to make a lap to get out of Q1. Q2 is about seeing who 4 makes it into q3 from the mid field. The top6 is always the same. Then Q3 is about the pole time. In a way Q1 is more exciting than Q2 because it can really change the weekend for some team. Not to mention that not many mid field teams even put much effort into progressing to Q3 from Q2 or doing a proper lap in Q3. Four sessions is just too much because you get the Q2 session twice which is already the most boring session of them all.

      I’d I had a chance to be bernie I’d just make Q1 about getting into top 14. Q2 is about getting into top 6. And then Q3 is the top 6 shootout one by one with the best Q2 qualifier deciding whether the top 6 does their laps first to last or last to first. Nobody else has a chance to get the pole anyways so there is no point making the Q3 to have 10 cars. As sad is sounds. Doing the qualifying that way would make the Q2 more exciting for the top cars as well because being fastest in Q2 had little bit of significance as well.

      Or just have Q1 session with all cars and then the positions 7-14 progress to Q2 which decides the midfield positions and the top 6 goes straight into Q3 so the top 6 drivers would not get extra laps in qualifying and there would be no tire allocation issues. That way both Q2 and Q1 have something to be excited for as Q1 decides the division 1 qualifying results and the Q2 decides the division 2 results. And neither solution would not take any more tv time than the current system.

      1. Typos. Fixed the last paragraph:
        Or just have Q1 session with all cars and then the positions 7-14 progress to Q2 which decides the midfield positions. The top 6 goes straight into Q3. That way the top 6 drivers would not get extra laps nor sessions in qualifying and there would be no tire allocation issues. That way all sessions have something to be excited about. Q1 decides who hoes to div 1 qualifier and who goes div2 qualifer. Then Q2 session decides the division 2 results and finally Q3 decides the pole. Neither solution would not take any more tv time than the current system.

        1. @socksolid – that last paragraph works as an interesting tweak, with an added advantage that Q1 result for the top teams becomes more important, they save tyres and effort by making sure they put in a solid lap (and for them makes it more likely they don’t in the end get into Q3 if they hit trouble and can’t fix it quickly; while I am not sure I like that, if that’s the purported goal of either Q1, or an extra session, then I prefer their cut-off to go to ‘top 6’ straight away, rather than them being able to go easy, narrowly getting into the top 14).

          I voted ‘slightly disagree’ as I doubt that it will in the end make a big negative difference, and maybe sometimes some positive, while I don’t like to be too negative on changes before they happen; but I don’t much care to see it happen either. Your post makes me less happy about a Q4 session, as you propose a much better way to get an effect like that, without adding that extra session, and also without costing extra time (or shortening the sessions, with maybe more addspace in between).

          1. My solution also has the benefit that mid field teams get a lot more tv visibility in Q2 because the top 6 cars would not run in Q2. That being said I don’t think f1 would ever agree to a top 6 qualifying session because it would really put it into writing that f1 has two divisions. Ferrari, mercedes and red bull in top 6 and then the rest. And a big divide in between. I’m sure the top teams would not want it either because it makes it tighter for them (easier to get into top10 or top8 than top6) and also when you have just 6 cars in the last session someone from the top 6 has to be last of the top 6.

            I think the biggest issue with my idea is that Q1 has lots of cars on track. A lot more complaining about blocking when 20 cars need to get a good lap. I don’t think it is a big issue on most tracks though.

      2. @socksolid I too would prefer they focus on tweaking the 3 session qualy rather than adding another session. I personally don’t find Q1 & Q2 all that interesting and i’m pretty much comatose waiting for Q3 to start. Q2 especially is dull because the top teams are on their race tyres and aren’t on the limit. Seeing which midfield runners get into the top 10 isn’t all that interesting either because those runners don’t add anything to Q3 (they get zero screen time).

        I like the idea of adding some significance to Q2 for the front runners. Deciding the order for a single lap shootout in Q3 would do that. Also making Q3 a top 6 shootout adds extra spice. Added pressure to the front runners to not make a mistake in Q2 and miss out. Then we get to see every lap from the top 6 which would mitigate the loss of seeing the drivers run twice. Having said that, how many laps do we actually get to see in Q3? No matter how good the director is i feel like we miss most of the action and the director tends to follow whoever goes first (pretty much random). Single lap shootout is definitely the way to go, or go back to a one hour session and allocate a couple of tyres every half hour to ensure we get some action in the beginning.

        Anyway, liked some of your suggestions.

      3. Being Bernie? Not even Bernie is Bernie anymore.

    12. It’s hard to judge this Q4 thingy is good or bad before we knew its detail format including tyre policy.

      1. From what we know of elimination there will be no new tyre policy. They will just throw it in as is and then make a u turn if it doesnt work instantly.

    13. Another potential bonus would see drivers who qualify ninth and tenth have a free choice of tyres

      That’s not even a reason for a 4th quali; you can do it today if you want to.

    14. I’m usually pretty central on these polls or with no opinion, but really this is just a ridiculous idea. Doesn’t change anything for the better… I can see why they want to do it, because when the commentators are shouting about who drops out is the most “entertaining” part of qualifying. Doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to have more of that at the cost of finding a representative grid order.

      Only change I want to see for qually (besides a top 10 shootout) is free reign on the tyres. Let all the drivers do their best lap on the best compound without worrying about what tyres they are starting on.

    15. Noooooooooooooooooooo!

    16. Adam (@rocketpanda)
      7th April 2019, 12:35

      Of all the things F1 could do to improve the show or help the sport, ‘fixing’ one of the things that aren’t broken isn’t it.

    17. I think the current Q1-Q2-Q3 system is good but with 2 changes

      Firstly, scrapping the stupid Q2 tyre rule. One of the most pointless rules in F1.

      Secondly, maybe only 8 drivers in Q3. So 6 drivers eliminated in Q1 and Q2. May increase the chance of one of the big 3 loosing a car in Q2!

      1. Secondly, maybe only 8 drivers in Q3. So 6 drivers eliminated in Q1 and Q2. May increase the chance of one of the big 3 loosing a car in Q2!

        How often did any of the big 3 end up in position 9 or 10 in Q2?
        @fish123

        1. Its happened occasionally
          e.g. Ricciardo last year in hungary i think, happened to hamilton once when he was trying to save a set of softs in 2017

          1. Ricciardo didn’t even make the top10….. due to the rain.
            Throwing in sprinklers will do more than eliminating 9th & 10th from Q3 :P

    18. Can anyone remember the thrill of the drivers chasing that extra point for FLAP in Bahrain? Safe to say no, I think. That change caused a blip of mild interest in the first race and now it’s virtually forgotten. Although the points could decide the championship, they’ll have been won months previously and so will add nothing to the actual excitement. Just possibly it will matter in the final race, but even then it will seem absurd if one driver, not necessarily in the lead, lucks into having the time or space to have a clear run to win it. Q4 isn’t the same level of bad, but it does mess with something that works.

      1. Do you remember the safety car bringing the cars home? @david-br
        And even before that, the crippled Ferrari made it much more rewarding for Hamilton, Bottas, and Verstappen to keep driving solid laps than chasing a FLAP (with or without an extra stop).

        1. @coldfly Well exactly, the FLAP point seems to be there as a race end distraction if nothing else is happening!

          1. FLAP point seems to be there as a race end distraction

            point taken (pun intended).
            @david-br

    19. There is so much broken in F1 but qualifying is one of the areas that actually works and is exciting. Whilst I don’t think having Q4 would change that, it just feels like change for the sake of change.

    20. georgeboole (@)
      7th April 2019, 13:06

      I believe the only reason for the new quali format would be how much time each team is shown on tv.
      I mean, do you see a Williams trying to get aroynd the track? Or just when they can’t make it to Q2?
      Probably they calculated it and saw that there would be more time available for the small teams, which means more satisfaction for the sponsors, which is a good thing.
      Otherwise I see no other reason for any change

      1. @georgeboole, Good point, I would vote for that as long it did not ruin Q. The lesser teams definitely need more exposure to attract sponsors.

    21. I object to anything that’s only purpose is to increase upredictability, unless it is about levelling the spending playing field. The results should be unpretictable because many teams are doing a good job with technological advancements and team procedures, not because the race procedures have been changed to deliberately increase the chance that a mistake kicks the best team. or the best driver to the back. That already happens too often for me as it is.

      I do like to see fast cars pushing their way from the back, but I much prefer to see fast cars racing each other on merit. F1 really has to decide what is its priority – show business or sport and technological superiority. Though I fear it has already decided – sadly.

    22. OK – prepared to be shot down on this one – why not reverse qualifying places, so we set the top 5 in Q1, next 5 in Q2 and remainder of the grid in Q3 – more TV time for the lower placed teams, better chance for a quirky top 5 or 10 interloper – and maybe a little more pushing in Q3.

      Just a thought – I’ll get my coat.

      1. Sounds interesting, but the PR/Advertisers would hate it as 90% of the audience would leave after the first session.

    23. If it’s the same as now with one more stage I just don’t see the point. Even the points made for and against are not meaningful enough to suggest a change that would have any sort of merit of its own. It could be two, three, four stages and it would be basically the same bit more or less complicated. Makes no sense.

      Also, more stages mean even less of an opportunity to really know what’s going on. TV directors have to chose what to show and they always miss the interesting stuff. It’s impossible for them to know in the end what will be the main thing to watch, that’s why I liked the one lap qualifying because you could see everything from every driver.

      And that leads me to what I feel would be a good change. The final stage of qualy should be a super pole style shootout. One lap each, 6 drivers maybe, see who really puts it together. It’d be a lot more exciting than nowadays, where you don’t even know what kind of lap the poleman did before they show the full onboard after the session is finished.

    24. No, [censored] [censored]. [Censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] no.

      Sorry, I don’t think I can politely express my contempt for this idea.

    25. Dutchguy (@justarandomdutchguy)
      7th April 2019, 13:59

      Currently, qualiyfing works. they tried changing it multiple times, and that did not work
      leave it as is

    26. One thing I’ve noticed watching Indycar is that in qualifying, they move the start/finish line to just before the pit entry. That means that you don’t have to do an in lap which makes a lot of sense.

      1. That would be a good move for quali; less cars on a cool down lap. @petebaldwin
        And FIA can sell it as a ‘saving the planet’ change ;)

    27. Pedro Andrade
      7th April 2019, 14:34

      This must be one of the most one-sided polls ever on this site. And I agree, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!

    28. I’m a bit disappointed that Liberty’s entire team of experts have failed to either find or apply common sense in this matter, and have not stopped the teams from draging this to a vote.

      They have the entire 2021 package to sort out, and they waste their time on this!?

    29. MotoGP Qualifying format is the best, why not adapt to that? Even Moto2 and Moto3 have adapted it.

    30. I voted for ‘strongly disagree’ without a doubt.

      1. I strongly agree.

            1. nah i got it , i was trying to place this comment in between them :)

    31. How abt 2 points for pole position!

    32. No one has mentioned how a Team Manager would approach this.
      If it is about saving tires, and you made it to the final 4, 6, 8 or what-ever, and you had no realistic shot at pole or even improving your position, would you even run.? Likely not. Save the engine, save the tyres, brakes etc.
      End result, your Premier Quali session might only be 3 or 4 cars on track. Boooooring.
      Even now, the midfield fight is for 11th. That gets you new tyres and a reasonable starting position. Being 9th or 10th is a bit of a curse.
      No is the vote from this corner.

    33. Just make it a one hour shootout between all cars and require 10 flying laps of each.

    34. Prize money, prize money, prize money!! They should just sort that out!!

    35. Personally, I like the current format. If, and I think it’s a big if, F1 goes to spec wheels, then in theory it should be cheaper to have more tires available during the weekend– especially wet tires.

      Running out of tires during a weekend shouldn’t happen (personal opinion).

    36. 4 opportunities to be eliminated increases the # of laps that matter. I like that idea. This is how it could work imho:

      1. With 12 minutes per session, drivers can do 2 runs per session to set a time (followed by a 3 min break from the flag to start of next session to allow drivers to finish their hot lap and get back to the pits in time for next session), and have 5 cars eliminated per session. Only 5 cars for a pole shootout means at least 1 driver and possibly more of the top 3 teams won’t make the run for pole.

      2. Give them 8 pairs of soft tyres, so that all runs are done on the softest tyres and lowest fuel levels.

      3. Give the drivers that are eliminated during Q1-3 a free choice of tyres for the race and force Q4 drivers to start on the Q4 tyres they set their fastest lap with. Also, make it obligatory to do at least 1 run (unless technically unable) in Q4 so that it is no benefit to not run in Q4.

    37. Are we sure Bernie the Bull is not still in charge. This is his sort of circus nonsense: definitely his style of flash showmanship.

    38. I would be (lightly) interested to see the effects of a single lap shoot out for everybody.
      shootout outing defined by inverted WDC position or in a saturday morning timed session.
      Other than that, maybe the return to the 90s 60 minute session.
      Besides that I see no gain in a Q4.

    39. Just No.

      They want a change?
      They can revert to the 1-hour-free-for-all-session from 1996 and see how well (or not) it is received.
      Still better than adding the artificial 4th part in the hope that some of the top drivers make an error and are eliminated before the shootout…

      1 hour, 12 laps for each driver… in my view that was the perfect format. And with today’s awful tires teams will be able to save enough sets for whatever strategy they wish…

    40. Don’t fix the one thing in F1 that doesn’t need fixing.

    41. Darran Donald
      7th April 2019, 20:09

      As most replys tell us is its not broken dont fix it!

      1 If they are replacing them they need to get it right as since they got rid of the 1 hour sessions this is the only idea thats really worked and there has been some god awful ideas to god awful idea each season in the 2000s. Just now i dont see how this works? i’ll always skip to the last 2 minutes of Q1 & Q2 then all of Q3. Based on the fact that the top 6 are so far clear it will just mean i skip more of the hour show.

      Like the whole sport tyres for me are what make and break qualifying. My solution is 4 sessions 2 free tyres for each session so all drivers must make 2 efforts. More track action, no loss of tyres for the race. In fact i’d go a step further and set when the tyres can be used 1 set of each for the practices, 2 for each round of quali, 2 of each kind for the race. Less practice info on the tyres makes for better races.

    42. This strikes me as something that would be over complicating something just for the sake of a little bit of intrigue. And would it even do that? I don’t think so, personally.

      Qualifying, as it is, works really well and throws up surprises quite often – making it more complex for no real reason just seems silly.
      Of all the complaints I’ve seen about F1, none of them – not one – have been about the current format of qualifying.

      Want to change something to see what happens? Ban DRS.

    43. the only thing keeping me at slightly disagree is that i don’t think their proposed plan would hurt anything, that said, i don’t think it would make the show any better either so there’s really no point in all this. Just get a good set of 2021 rules out on time and everyone will be happy. Everything else is just a distraction.

    44. The current qualifying format is a bit rubbish to be fair and adding another segment will do nothing to improve things, it will just drag it out and make things more difficult for the smaller teams to succeed. They really should return to a single lap style qualifying, advantages being it is more unpredictable and exciting for TV, less time wasting, greater pressure on the drivers to perform, no potential blocking tactics and it is more environmentally friendly, disadvantages being there is less action for the circuit spectators, however strong supporting races should be added to the schedule to more than make up for this.

    45. Its very clear what the answer is
      The F1 community has spoken! If introduced it’s all for tv commercial time. If they provide an extra set of tyres, what a waste of money and resources.

    46. Just another example of tinkering around and being able to say “we did something”.

      Change for change sake does nothing to improve the sport and can potentially make it worse.

      There is absolutely no need to do this for 2020. If F1 needs things to change, then let’s have them change in line with everything else in 2021, and not just mess with some part that doesn’t need it for the sake of appearing to be “doing something”.

    47. Just like most others here, I really don’t see the point to this change. The “advantages” are both circumstantial (rely on teams to mis time? When it’s tighter, they will take more care) and non issues – the tyre choice. If anything, I could see a good reason to just drop the “top 10 starting on Q2 tyres” thing.

    48. Qualifying is perfect. Leave it alone.

    49. No. I mean, just no.

      FFS no

      1. really, just grow up. This is not how you make stuff more interesting. Gonna repeat myself and suggest they should instead oblige cars to use the same tyres twice in the race (rather than obliging 2 different compounds), starting on what they used in Q3. That would at least add strategic complexity, but this Q4 idea is just more wasted tyres and a smaller pole shootout

    50. @josh5holland Do you mean Q2 tire issue? If not, what is the Q3 tire issue?

      I don’t think we need a Q4 and I think it would make qualifying worse. But what I want to know is, why are they even thinking about it, honestly? Do they need/want more ad revenue and this is one way for them to get that? If so, what will they use the money for? Or do they think qualifying has a problem and this is a remedy, if so, how is it?

      I dislike F1, FIA, etc just spitting out random ideas, but at least tell us why something is under consideration so that we can give our opinion with an understanding of the reasoning behind it. Maybe there are good reasons for Q4—or at least semi-reasonable ones—that we should consider. But without an explanation of what those are, we can only opine based on assumptions.

    51. Can we run the grids in reverse order to championship standings just for funsies ?

    52. Any chance you can put the views of these surveys to the people in power @keithcollantine? Sick of changes that we’ve not asked for and not wanted time and again

    53. Q1 and Q2: As before
      Q3: Top ten shootout

      Driver in P10 in Q2 goes out first, one flying lap and comes in. Next driver released from pitlane after first driver passes pit exit.

      Wildcard rule to speed things up: If you are caught on your in-lap, you’re given a grid penalty. This would encourage drivers to hurry things up on their out/in laps to avoid a penalty and increase the chance that they can force a rival to cop a penalty.

      The issue with the current system I have is that you don’t actually see any of the action. They show a boring telephoto shot of the finish line, with cars driving in a straight line. You don’t know the order the cars are running, you don’t know if someone has made a mistake or someone is super quick, unless the commentators mention it. Show me 10 whole laps of everyone at the absolute limit. If you have to show a replay of the pole position lap after the fact, the format doesn’t work.

    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'.