Pirelli Seek To Tweak Quali RUles

[ESPImperium]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92602

Basically if you sit out Q3, you start on the set you set your fastest time in Q2 with.

Intresting. But id limit the teams to 5 sets of tyres for Quali and the race, 3 option and 2 prime. One set of new prime and options must be kept for the race. Meaning that top teams will have to run on a set of primes for Q1 just to make it, and sometimes in Q2 as well.

Also would mean that Red Bulls sitting in the garrage in a "too cool for school" manner in Quali would be gone as you could have Saubers, Williams, STRs and Force India cars setting times in Q2 that put them P1 on options just to get them thrugh.

Then you start on the tyres you set the fastest time on, for the Q3 guys, and then the Q2 and downward guys who have a new set of tires can gain a better advantage in the first phase of the race.

Also means that more 3 stop strategies become more the norm for the Q2 guys. as this could just be faster on some tracks.

However Pirelli need to get a consistant 1.2 to 1.5 second a lap step between all their tyre compounds first i think.

[strad]

The idea of the format was to have cars on track...pandering to the fans...Can't have em sitting out and boring the fans now can we?

[feni_remmen]

Ok. First of all what i am about to say is full of problems..
If you make it into Q3, you can only race on tires that have been used in Qualifying for laps within 107% of your best time.

Or give them an extra set of tires for the race (though, I don't think this really solves anything)!

[raymondu999]

How about, to make it equal, EVERYONE starts on the set they set their fastest time on? Kind of like the current rules for Q3 but expanded to everyone.

[feni_remmen]

That would work, except that the original intention of not applying this rule to those outside the top ten was to open up some variance in strategies and mix up the results a bit, by allowing those outside the topten to do as they wish. In a way this discussion is not relevant, as the real problem is not those at the bottom of the top ten not running. The real problem is the advantage of moving from 4th to 2nd by running a second time is not justified if it costs you another set of softs. Another solution might be to give the top ten a free set of softs if they run twice in the final ten minutes. Effectively saying that if you use a set in the first 5 minutes, you can have a free set if you want to go out for another run in the last 5 minutes. Give us back the slower set of tires and go for your lives!

[marcush.]

interesting announcement from Pirelli and reflecting my ideas for a very agressive strategy .funny enough nobody dared to do it in a race until now except those who had no other option like webber who blew his Q back then .
I think it shows very much just how conservative teams are in terms of startegies when there is not really that much risk coming with it...on the other hand everyone seems to be in love with the idea to glue every update on the car some boffin has come up with to gain the odd half tenth of a second a lap maybe but costing you seconds in the long term due to compromising in heatdamage or tyre endurance...I think not only drivers need big balls .strategists do as well.And :You don´t race unproven packages -iron rule of racing -still valid.

[feni_remmen]

I think that the risk vs reward is greater when you are say 10th (than 20th) and starting on hards. The key no matter what is always to be fast when the others are slow, but you need to make sure you the opposite isn't true. It's no use losing a second a lap if you can't make it pay later. It's hard to imagine that it could be any better by starting further back, but it might be somewhat different if you have a full bag of fresh tires. It bights you twice as well. because you can't use the hards for longer at the start, because the others will pit and be faster again...
Also, in Webber's case in China, he started with cars that would always slow him down, so he gained very little being on soft and compromised.
The key is being fast when the others are slow, but if you lose as much as you gain, it is useless. It still does surprise me that more teams haven't explored the hard, soft, soft, soft routine. It seems that logic (and distant f1 history) should say hards when heavy, then softs when the car is light and you can make them work. Like Webber in China! The simulations would show the numbers and the numbers don't lie.