Introducing reverse grids to sprint races “won’t work” to improve racing within them, says Mercedes’ George Russell.
Formula 1 held six sprint events in 2023 – the most of any season since the format was introduced two years earlier.The controversial format has been hailed by F1’s commercial rights holders, FOM, but fan reaction has been mixed. In a RaceFans poll earlier this year, an overwhelming majority of readers said they preferred a standard grand prix format to sprint race rounds.
Several team principals have said the latest iteration of the format needs further changes, including Red Bull’s Christian Horner.
“I think the concept is fine,” Horner said, “but I think the execution, we can do a better job in making it more exciting for the viewer.”
One proposal suggested by Horner and others involves reversing race grids for print grounds based on the results of grand prix qualifying sessions, with either the entire grid reversed or partially, like in Formula 2 or Formula 3. F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali has repeatedly pushed for this format.
However, Russell – who experienced reverse grids in both junior categories, disagrees that reversing grids for sprint races would create better racing.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
“I won’t talk on behalf of the drivers, but my own personal view is I don’t think reverse grid races will work,” he said in response to a question from RaceFans.
“Purely because I learned this when I raced in Formula 3 and Formula 2. If you’ve got the 10 fastest cars, the most challenging car to overtake is the one who you’re fighting with. If you reverse that grid, you’re going to have the quickest car in 10th trying to overtake the second-quickest car in ninth, which is trying to overtake the third-quickest car which is in eighth. So each car is actually trying to overtake their most direct competitor.”
With faster cars running behind slower ones, Russell says, sprint races could end up becoming more processional as a result.
“What you’ll probably actually find is it would just be a DRS train,” he explained. “Because you might have – you know – a Williams leading from a Haas, who can’t quite get past, who’s leading from an Alpine, who’s then leading from a McLaren or whoever. So I think the concept won’t work.”
Russell believes the best way of encouraging better racing in sprint races would be encourage an element of tyre strategy for each 100 kilometre race.
“The best sprint races so far have been when there’s either been tyre degradation, like we saw in Qatar, and people on different strategies,” he said.
“Equally in Brazil, the tyres could only just make it to the 25 laps, whatever it was, and it was a good race. But most of the time in the sprint races, you put the medium tyre on and you’re just flat-out to the end and there’s no good racing.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2023 F1 season
- FIA president cleared of alleged interference in two 2023 races
- First week viewing figures for new Drive to Survive season fall again
- Max who? Drive to Survive season six prefers its favourite faces
- RaceFans’ complete 2023 season review
- The F1 drivers who pulled off the 10 biggest charges through the field in 2023
Alan Dove
30th November 2023, 13:09
Reverse grids are about putting ‘fresh faces’ on the podiums as much as having ‘good’ racing. So you have to look at it from a marketing perspective and column inches seeing a an Alonso, an Ocon or an Albon will off-set any possible events that have DRS trains. I suspect both aspects of Reverse Grids are being aimed at. Chaotic racing and new faces fro the Saturday videos and headlines.
I don’t know what hurdles Liberty face pushing through these farcical, laughable and demeaning changes, but this is all about marketing and PR and the possibility of DRS trains aren’t enough to put them off.
elchinero (@elchinero)
30th November 2023, 13:28
Don’t have “DRS”
AlanD
30th November 2023, 13:45
Elchinero, that off the cuff remmark got me thinking. Suppose we had a reverse grid race with no DRS. Would we still get trains? I think we might well do. When I hear drivers like Russell complaining they couldn’t pass because the car ahead was also getting DRS off the car in front, it makes me think they feel they are entitled to a free pass once they within a second of someone.
Gimi
30th November 2023, 15:18
We used to have trains in the pre DRS days too, Trulli was the master of them, so yes we would get trains with or without DRS, think about it in a DRS train the train conductor is fast enough to keep the 2nd at bay even if the 2nd can get close to around 1 second off is not enough for him to pass, so remove DRS and you have the same train the difference is they know are around 1 second off instead of a constant half a second off.
A way faster car could escape the train now thanks to these ground effect cars but eventually the train would trap more cars, in the old days a faster car could be trapped in the train too because of the dirty air.
And to be honest nobody likes the trains as a spectator but as a driver you have to give props to the train conductor, he manages to keep ahead with a slower car even if the guy behind has DRS and if you don’t like that then you don’t like racing you just like winning which is why Russell is always complaining when the race gets hard.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
1st December 2023, 15:00
Good point, I had been thinking as well if disabling drs could solve this issue, but like you said the car in front has no drs when a train happens, and yet it’s able to keep the 2nd car behind.
MichaelN
30th November 2023, 16:01
Sure, because the inherent difference in speed between the cars is very rarely enough to make the move. Especially in the sprint sessions, the variables F1 relies on to increase those differences don’t really work too well.
That’s why you don’t do sprint racing with endurance cars, or endurance racing with sprint cars. Both types of cars and both types of races are fun, but they have to be aligned.
Roger Ayles (@roger-ayles)
30th November 2023, 14:00
If you do something along the lines of what he says at the end with more tyre management/strategy are you not just completely going against the whole concept of it been a sprint race?
At what point do they just need to take a step back and see that it isn’t really working & that no amount of throwing more artificial nonsense at them to try & create some sort of fake drama will make them any better.
grat
30th November 2023, 14:17
The powers-that-be keep forgetting the fundamental rule of F1– No matter what you do to try to force spontaneity and unpredictability, the engineers and strategists will do their job, and engineer out as many variables as possible to maximize the benefit to the team.
The best analogy would be computer games– a game developer puts out what they think is a perfectly balanced game, and the first week the game is out, every single exploit will be found and… well… exploited.
The concept of game theory applies to F1 as well.
Alan Dove
30th November 2023, 14:20
They know this, hence the push for new gimmicks. I don’t think they are looking for permanent solutions.
Biskit Boy (@sean-p-newmanlive-co-uk)
1st December 2023, 9:08
100% agreed. Gimmicks will never work.
The best entertainment is natural close racing. That’s all we need. The question is how to achieve this?
I say the cars must be able to run close together and the driver must make more of a difference.
I think this can only happen with massively reduced over car aero. Tiny or no front wing. Tea tray rear wing like in the late 70s early eighties ground effect era. It’s the only way.
MichaelN
30th November 2023, 16:10
Yes, but that’s the only real solution F1 has had to offer since 2011; bad tyres that create differences in pace that are big enough to create overtaking opportunities. That, and awful DRS. The idea espoused by Russell that a race car being “just flat-out to the end” is a problem is both emblematic of current F1, and somewhat tragic.
SadF1fan
30th November 2023, 14:10
Trains and processions are inherent to professional racing, as chessmatch like football is inherent to professional football.
The more professional athletes become, the fewer mistakes they make, the less spectacular the sport becomes.
The sport could become more difficult so that athletes will be forced into making more mistakes. It will also means that the most talented athletes will dominate even more, and that athletes inherently will choose strategies that are more risk averse, which again would be less spectacular.
Or you could make the sport easier so that less skill is required and that risky strategies and luck are more rewarded than they are now.
MichaelN
30th November 2023, 16:32
This is a great point that’s not made often enough. Aside from differences in tyres, top speed, etc. the effects of making mistakes can be a huge ‘delta’ that can lead to overtakes and losing gaps.
Every sport tries to find a balance between accessibility and challenge, and at present I think a good argument can be made that F1 is ‘too easy’. Mostly in the races; when they’re all driving well within their own margins to make the tyres last. Compare to the race in Qatar with the limits on stint length, where many drivers were racing on the limit throughout the race for the first time in their F1 career, and many struggled to keep up that relentless pace.
More mistakes, and bigger punishments for those mistakes (more grass, less tarmac), can definitely help spice up the races.
Dex
30th November 2023, 14:36
It’s not racing at all, if the slowest driver gets the highest position. It’s making fun of racing. This is the reason why I’ve stopped watching some racing series in the past, and I wouldn’t have dreamed that the day will come when F1 would consider embracing such format that belongs in video games at best. Plus it won’t even bring that artificial excitement, because passing in F1 is either extremely easy and routinish if you’re in the better car, or nearly to absolutely impossible on certain tracks or under certain conditions.
What kind of emotion can be involved with, say, Sargeant or Stroll winning a reverse grid “kinda-race”, or Verstappen overtaking such underdogs to score another win? I don’t wanna watch this…
Alan Dove
30th November 2023, 15:00
I won’t be watching either but…
… the reality is that Reverse Grids will generate headlines on Saturday with ‘new’ winners. This will be paraded and celebrated as if meaningful as what happens with other reverse grid races. It is the antithesis of F1, but I don’t think those in charge are that bothered about heritage and that kind of thing. F1 is very much lost in that regard. In terms of headlines and coverage, Reverse Grids will be a complete success in the eyes of Liberty and the general media. One can predict the headlines now “Why Reverse Grids have proved the doubters wrong”. I think Racefans will be more reflective but other outlets will be rammed full that kind of thing.
notagrumpyfan
30th November 2023, 16:38
Isn’t it the other way around: if you order the cars from fastest (on pole) to slowest (at the back) its not racing but pre-arranging the likely outcome?
Maybe F1 should stop qualifying altogether and line up the cars randomly or some other equitable way*. That’s how many other sports start a match.
* Knowing Liberty I’m sure they will create an auction between the teams for grid spots; with Monaco obviously getting the overal highest bid.
Chris Horton
30th November 2023, 14:49
Then why are the fastest cars almost unstoppable in over coming grid penalties?
They don’t just end up stuck at the back in one enormous drs train do they. A fast car will make it from the back to roughly within 3 or 4 positions of where it would have qualified and raced under normal circumstances.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
1st December 2023, 16:03
I’m guessing cause you’re the only one out of position in that case, you don’t just have a car almost as fast as yours in front of you and so on.
Gimi
30th November 2023, 15:02
Yeah because a Mercedes running behind Max which pulls away half a second a lap it’s so much better, I understand Russell not wanting Mercedes to lose points to slower cars in a reverse grid but c´mon is it so bad that a top tier car has to work for the win instead of just qualify in P1 and take off?
Sure it’s the pole sitter right to take off from turn 1 and dominate and I agree with it, so let’s go for no more spring races, but Liberty is not gonna drop the sprint weekends and considering that then I’m all for a complete reverse grid at least it would be something different with the low tier teams fighting at the front with the high tier teams coming from behind instead of the usual boring short version of the regular race.
And obviously to get it to work you have to get rid of the “Spring shootout” as well, do FP1/2 on friday and then is qualy plus this reverse race on saturday which is a plus, no more two qualifiers per GP which is just stupid, so bring it on FOM give me full reverse grid.
Grapmg
30th November 2023, 15:57
I’m against reverse grid because I think it doesn’t belong in F1. But if it’s introduced in the sprint do you really think that the top qualifiers are going to risk damage when they have to pass the complete field for a few points on Saturday? I guess the “pole sitter” is not going to waste much time on something that is almost a lost race from the back.
Gimi
1st December 2023, 14:41
That is a similar argument before we had a single sprint weekend back in 2020 when only the top 3 got points and the sprint decided the starting grid, will the drivers risk damage for 1 position or 2 and we got our answer, yes they will race hard even if it’s only for a few points or a position.
For more proof the driver of this news has done it a few times this season, Russell and Hamilton as well only qualified 15 and 18 in the sprint (Russell was 11 for the race, Hamilton 5) they both fought back to 8 and 10, Russell getting a single point, Hamilton didn’t even get a point (should have just retired to not risk damage since he was 5th on the grid right?).
Hamilton did something similar in Qatar, he was 3rd for the race, but only 12 for the sprint and he went to finish 5th in the sprint, so yes the top runners will race for the win, no matter what, this is why Max hates sprint races but also has the most sprint wins, everyone wants to win.
Gimi
1st December 2023, 14:50
Missing context, this was at the Austrian GP, even worse the track was wet in the sprint, so if there was any race to not risk damage and retire it was this one, but Mercedes went for it.
BassClef (@bassclef)
30th November 2023, 15:31
I’m not a fan of DRS but perhaps they can consider limiting the number of times a driver can use it during a race. Similar to what Indycar does with push to pass.
Craig
30th November 2023, 16:11
A similar concept is used in Indycar with them having so much boost to use throughout a race. Certainly a concept worth investigating and adopting.
CarWars (@maxv)
30th November 2023, 15:49
if they make the sprint races a separate championship we can comfortably stop watching
notagrumpyfan
30th November 2023, 16:43
As long as you don’t make it a ‘friendly’ then most people will still watch.
Think National League versus Champions League versus Cup fights.
Zann (@zann)
30th November 2023, 16:32
you can’t know this in fact, because the comments system encourages people to have multiple accounts and change their names all the time. So you get one nutcase striking a stupid attitude or trying to be clever, and then arguing with himself, agreeing, insulting, calling himself ‘mate’ and all this. You get whole threads all being the same actual person
and then in the real world, who’d rather watch an FP than a Sprint qualy or race?
Craig
30th November 2023, 17:31
Are you implying there’s a conspiracy? Perhaps the reality of the situation is that people don’t like sprint weekends.
asz
30th November 2023, 18:33
Yes, that is the major recurring argument.
I do not watch the 3 FPs but the Grand Prix that follows on Sunday feels special. I do watch sprints but the “big” race feels devalued afterwards.
One could, therefore, say that an attitude like mine demonstrates the success of this strategy: I end up watching more F1.
But my motivation to do so is slowly waning (because of the feeling of devaluation), so perhaps sprint races produce a short-term spike and a long-term decline in terms of fan engagement, after all.
Zann (@zann)
30th November 2023, 18:54
well yes if it makes F1 racing less rare it’s making it less special, same as chocolate! Fair enough. But i think there’s a better format somewhere to make better use of the three days, after they’ve flown everything there and spent the week setting up
Craig
30th November 2023, 19:05
Don’t forget F1 typically isn’t the only thing racing on a given weekend, usually supported by F2, F3 and Porsche Super Cup.
An alternative format I half thought up for a weekend where there’s very little in the way of support races is to just have 2 full length races. Friday would have 2 practice sessions and qualifying, where the fastest 2 laps a driver sets determines their grid positions. Saturday would have a further practice session with limited scope to change setups followed by race 1. Sunday would have another practice session with parc ferme conditions completely removed followed by race 2.
While I appreciate there’s likely a lot of holes in such a concept, it means there’s 2 races of a length F1 cars are actually designed for, set ups aren’t locked in after only 1 hour of practice that may or may not be representative of the conditions of the race and it gives an excuse to not go to as many venues (cutting down on some of the fatigue fans are feeling, as well as the teams) without cutting down on number of races. It wouldn’t need to be every weekend, just 2 or 3 times a year so it still feels like something of worth.
Zann (@zann)
30th November 2023, 20:13
yes the length of the race is a big issue isn’t it, whether tyres come into it and then strategy, undercuts, overcuts, all things that are a big part of F1. Can they manage two full races tho? A Sprint isn’t really different from qualifying, in principle. Perhaps it needs sprinklers :) Wet the track, start the sprint and let it dry
Vinicius Neves
30th November 2023, 16:57
Russell is wrong, he simply may not want to race behind.
Faster cars have no problem overtaking slower cars even with same tire age.
StephenH
30th November 2023, 17:00
Read my lips ..
I . DO. NOT. WANT. MORE. SPRINT. RACES. OR. REVERSE. GRIDS.
Vinicius Neves
30th November 2023, 23:35
why not?
J765
30th November 2023, 17:14
They should limit the usage of DRS, like once per lap, or 50 times over the whole race. That would get rid of the DRS trains and make those battles spicier.
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
30th November 2023, 19:54
There’s a range of skills required to produce a good result in a normal race, e.g. starting on the right tyre, choosing the right time to change tyres, determining how powerful the undercut is, determining who will be in front when your car returns to the race, etc. Then we have a Sprint Race, so what are the skills this racing format is intended to promote? For example, not having the mandatory pit stop means you can’t use a pitstop as a means of overtaking a competitor. So driver skill is starting to become more dominant, strategies such as when to change tyres become insignificant, and the teamwork between the pit crew and the driver when changing tyres isn’t important. Whatever format is chosen for the Sprint Race should encourage the skills we want to see in a Sprint Race.
Imre (@f1mre)
30th November 2023, 23:22
DRS trains = normal racing before 2011.
Derek
1st December 2023, 0:31
If you don’t think Logan Sargeant winning a race from the entire grid within 10 seconds would be absolute must-watch television… You’re off your friggin rocker.
If you think Logan would actually win in that scenario… Then you’re beyond saving.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
1st December 2023, 16:11
Good point, he would get passed by many cars, the challenge would probably end up in the points in that scenario, other than winning!
Dan Rooke (@geekzilla9000)
1st December 2023, 8:57
I just can’t get excited about watching a a driver being gifted pole, and then dropping back through the grid as the usual pecking order is established.
Reverse Grids are the main thing I’ve been fearful of in F1. I love F1 and like many others here it means a lot to me and so it’s hard to not feel hurt by actions which seem to rip chunks out of something you arrange your weekends around.
It’s a sport and should remain a sport. It means you’ll have teams or drivers dominate, but that’s how sport works. In tennis you wouldn’t have officials saying that Nadal or Djokovic have to play with a smaller racket, or start 3 sets down to make it more exciting.
Annoyingly, the F1 field is tantalisingly close to being the closest I’ve ever seen it – it’s just that Max has mastered that Red Bull to god-tier levels. It’s not up to Liberty, or the FIA, or TV channels to figure out ways to artificially add spice to the weekend. It’s for the teams to engineer clever solutions and keep an eye out for top talent.
Maybe the solution isn’t in format changes, maybe it’s to relax regulations around development. Keep a budget cap, it encourages smaller outfits and prevents wealthy teams from buying the front two or three rows. Maybe have teams share basic design schematics after the first season, maybe make the regs slightly less prescriptive, maybe let the teams have more freedom to innovate. Have as many fireworks, driver parades, animated graphics and trackside celebrities as you want – but keep the racing pure. It might be fairly predictable a lot of the time, but watching some of the best drivers in the world drive to millimetre precision along a barrier or wall can be spectacle enough if we don’t distract from it with artificially mixed up grids, or attempts to turn it into Mario Kart …I love Moo Moo Meadows and Rainbow Road, but I don’t want to see a Mclaren spinning into a cow or a Ferrari dropping from a 360 loop into the cosmos.
S
1st December 2023, 14:20
You think it’s much more exciting for a driver to be gifted pole (by having the ‘best’ car) and then driving away unopposed – thus reinforcing the usual pecking order of fastest cars in front and slowest cars at the back?
It has never primarily been a sport. A deliberately restricted engineering competition of sorts now morphed almost entirely into an advertising competition and self-fulfilling business cartel.
In tennis, players don’t have fundamentally different rackets that massively influence their performance and potential results. Even the cheapest tennis racket performs almost identically to the most expensive and developmentally advanced racket. Tennis is more comparable to a spec motor racing series, in that respect.
And, of course, there’s the most obvious of factors in that tennis doesn’t use any active machinery at all. It is purely a human activity, involving only passive equipment beyond the human body.
As for reversing the grid order – that’s not even comparable to a handful of points (at most) in a tennis match, never mind a set or more. It’s about 150m of a 305km race….
Having said that, handicaps are common in many sports – most notably horse racing. Perhaps the most comparable ‘sport’ to car racing that doesn’t involve any machinery.
Well, it is, actually. Liberty and the TV channels are trying to sell it to the largest number of people possible.
Not so much the FIA, though – but they do benefit from the increased competition and racing action too.
As do the viewers.
Been there, done that, it wasn’t sufficiently satisfying or profitable – and it lead to where we are today… Ever-tightening technical regs, and the content and application of the sporting regs constantly being manipulated to increase the quality and quantity of the on-track product to satisfy the demands of stakeholders and consumers.
Does that sound more like sport or business to you?
Apart from the obvious safety and practicality issues in this sentence (the reason most circuits now have plentiful tarmac runoff areas) – the drivers have proven over and over again that they can’t (or simply choose not to) drive with that level of precision, and are full to the brim with excuses as to why they can’t even stay on the track.
As to the level of spectacle in modern F1 – the cars always appear to be on rails, making them surprisingly unspectacular to watch. They aren’t visibly moving around like they were 20+ years ago, clearly a handful for the drivers of the day. The sound rather dull now, too, which doesn’t help with that spectacle. And then there’s the massive over-reliance on aero for performance which affects every aspect of how interesting they are to watch – including the flow-on consequences such as tyre performance and wear, fuel minimisation, strategic conservation and electrical energy recovery/deployment strategy.
Most of the suggestions people are making to keep F1 interesting (or more the way they want it to be) involve effectively turning back time.
And if that’s the solution, there’s no need to complicate things – simply removing data sensors and telemetry would be the simplest and most effective way to make it all better – taking the focus away from the engineers and their computers and putting it back where it belongs.
In the driver’s seat.