New qualifying format...

[strad]

[Q]how can u police it?[/Q]
Are you kidding?
Well when you run a 2m 28.5 s qualifying run, then suddenly gain over a second and a half in the race with no change it track conditions,,,, You've been sandbagging and in some small bullrings you SUFFER the consequences at the hands of you competitors.

[Cold Fussion]

If you design a system that requires anti sandbagging rules to work, then your system is a complete failure because it no longer rewards excellence.

[zac510]

[Q]how can u police it?[/Q]
Are you kidding?
Well when you run a 2m 28.5 s qualifying run, then suddenly gain over a second and a half in the race with no change it track conditions,,,, You've been sandbagging and in some small bullrings you SUFFER the consequences at the hands of you competitors.

What kind of suffering? Would we Arrivabene be allowed to bend Toto Wolff's fingers backwards until he confesses what lap they plan to make their first stop on?

[siskue2005]

how can u police it?

Are you kidding?
Well when you run a 2m 28.5 s qualifying run, then suddenly gain over a second and a half in the race with no change it track conditions,,,, You've been sandbagging and in some small bullrings you SUFFER the consequences at the hands of you competitors.

what if I make a mistake and run wide into the gravel trap? how can you prove i made the mistake intentionally?

[strad]

how disingenuous can you be?

[zac510]

how disingenuous can you be?

How evasive can you be?

It'd be nice if you answer the question. You are trying to tell us how great your qualifying idea is. If we guess the answer ourselves, we may misrepresent what you intend.

[siskue2005]

No I am sincerely asking this question. How would u prove that if someone ran wide intentionally or it was just a mistake

[strad]

how disingenuous can you be?

How evasive can you be?

It'd be nice if you answer the question. You are trying to tell us how great your qualifying idea is. If we guess the answer ourselves, we may misrepresent what you intend.

Nobody is being evasive and I NEVER said I endorse it.
Hell I used to have to suffer with I. AND I can guarantee you KNOW when someone is sandbagging.
If your regular competition runs slow in qualifying and twenty minutes later miraculously lobs off 2½ seconds in the race you can be pretty sure he was sandbagging.
In your class you know what your friends and especially your competition is capable of running.
IF Hamilton just couldn't get up to speed in qualifying but suddenly with no big changes clips a few seconds off on lap one, what would you think?

[strad]

No I am sincerely asking this question. How would u prove that if someone ran wide intentionally or it was just a mistake

I did say on the old bullrings, ,you know small ovals all over the country...
and in road racing you don't consistently misjudge turn three in qualifying and then hit it perfect for 57 laps in the race.
Proof? There's no stinnkin' proof.
IF a guy was thought by his friends and competitors to be cheating, I assure you without proof he'd never make it to the win.

[siskue2005]

what you are saying is subjective, we need to be objective in our decision making. Just coz someone "knows" doesnt mean he "has to be".
In race it is different you dont push at all, you can do the entire race without running wide, but someone can argue that he was pushing to the limit and made a mistake.

There is no way to police sandbagging, or have an objective verdict on it.

For a reverse grid to work, they should offer more points in qualy than in race. Then everyone will run to their maximum in qualy and race from behind.

[strad]

one way.......

To prevent sandbagging in World of Outlaws sprint car races, the winner and runner-up in each heat race, along with the two fastest qualifiers who have qualified for the feature but are not one of the top two drivers, participate in a short heat race-length race that determines the starting order for the first ten (or twelve if there are five heat races) starting positions in the feature.

[nevill3]

The only reverse grid that would work is the reverse of the championship standings, as has been said on here before. That way the fastest teams and drivers will have to pass the slower teams on track every race to maintain their lead of the championship. The designers will have to design cars more capable of passing, and the best drivers will rise to the top because of their race craft as well as having superior machinery.

Saturdays could either be another free practice session or perhaps a new mini race to entertain the fans, perhaps only one car per team and a mandatory pit stop to switch drivers with points going towards the constructors companionship. Teams could use their reserve drivers or special guest stars (That have a superlicence) to spice things up too.

[Glyn]

They should have a race, where all the drivers use exactly the same cars.
And have a mini qualifying session.

So we can see who really get's the wooden spoon of being the fastest on the grid.

[hollus]

It think it is quite fair to recap who was right and who was wrong a few weeks ago:

The more I think about the consequences of the new Q format, the more I like it. It will be stewarding hell, but a good improvement to "the show". Yes, it is a show (and a sport).
The old Q format was becoming too predictable but for two flurries of action when everyone tried to improve a the same time in the last minute of Q2 and Q3, and then everything happened too fast to follow. Now things will happen one at a time and it will be easy to know where to focus as an spectator. One could make awesome graphics showing, for example, the current sector times of the last 3 cars plus the sectors of their best laps so far. A 4-way split screen allows to follow precisely those cars.
A bit of chaos will be thrown in the mix, but the order will still be decided by who is fastest on track when it matters, and people will learn to love the accasional last minute save or last minute fumble, including the need to come back through the field come race day...
Here comes a bold prediction: this will be called the best format ever way before year's end.

But while I get my foot out of my mouth, I think the system was maligned more on concept and perceptions than on real life effects. Yesterday in Sochi we did have cars on track for the final minutes. But instead Raikonnen had the track for himself for the first 2 minutes, the first significant time was set more than 4 minutes into the session and we were delighted with superslow motion replays and shots of mechanics in their pit boxes between 6 and 4 minutes to the end. And then came all the "excitement" of the final minutes.

This is Q3 from Sochi in 3 screenshots. Completely different to the elimination system /sarcasm off/.


P.S. That said, there is nothing wrong with the current system, IMO, one of the best we've had.

[henry]

It think it is quite fair to recap who was right and who was wrong a few weeks ago:

The more I think about the consequences of the new Q format, the more I like it. It will be stewarding hell, but a good improvement to "the show". Yes, it is a show (and a sport).
The old Q format was becoming too predictable but for two flurries of action when everyone tried to improve a the same time in the last minute of Q2 and Q3, and then everything happened too fast to follow. Now things will happen one at a time and it will be easy to know where to focus as an spectator. One could make awesome graphics showing, for example, the current sector times of the last 3 cars plus the sectors of their best laps so far. A 4-way split screen allows to follow precisely those cars.
A bit of chaos will be thrown in the mix, but the order will still be decided by who is fastest on track when it matters, and people will learn to love the accasional last minute save or last minute fumble, including the need to come back through the field come race day...
Here comes a bold prediction: this will be called the best format ever way before year's end.

But while I get my foot out of my mouth, I think the system was maligned more on concept and perceptions than on real life effects. Yesterday in Sochi we did have cars on track for the final minutes. But instead Raikonnen had the track for himself for the first 2 minutes, the first significant time was set more than 4 minutes into the session and we were delighted with superslow motion replays and shots of mechanics in their pit boxes between 6 and 4 minutes to the end. And then came all the "excitement" of the final minutes.

This is Q3 from Sochi in 3 screenshots. Completely different to the elimination system /sarcasm off/.
http://i.imgur.com/8tnThTk.png

P.S. That said, there is nothing wrong with the current system, IMO, one of the best we've had.

The format we have returned to fits well with the way we humans experience the world. The natural human tendency is to remember and give more credence to what we experience at the end of a period. Crescendos are good. So loading the action and excitement towards the end of the session is much better for human satisfaction than having an arrangement with an even more exciting mid session but nothing happening at the end. The human mind works in a particular way and it takes an enormous effort to replace feeling with rationality.