Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Albert Park, 2016

More qualifying changes under discussion for 2017

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Formula One is considering more changes to its qualifying format for next season.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Is Ron Dennis’s claim McLaren will be the next champions after Mercedes really that unlikely?

One could argue that the team that gives up on 2016 first and starts focusing on 2017 may have an advantage with the new rules, at least among the big teams. Mr Dennis, in conceding 2016 to Mercedes, may be indicating that McLaren and Honda are already moving on to 2017. As long as Ferrari and Red Bull are pressuring Mercedes in 2016, none of those teams may feel inclined to invest too heavily in 2017.

So. Good luck with that, McLaren. Change is always interesting. But you do have a long way to go with your power unit partner.
@Scalextric

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Sumedh and Joe Papp!

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

Nigel Mansell took victory for Williams at Spa-Francorchamps on this day 30 years ago despite spinning at the Bus Stop Chicane on the earlier configuration of the circuit. Ayrton Senna was second ahead of Stefan Johansson, who disobeyed an order from the Ferrari pit wall to follow team mate Michele Alboreto home.

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

  • 77 comments on “More qualifying changes under discussion for 2017”

    1. “We will be discussing race weekend formats, among which will be qualifying, but that would be for 2017 at the earliest.”

      Well, that did not take too long.
      They sure know how to rile fans up.

      1. “I was matching and beating Daniel, I scored more points than Daniel and it would have been the same this year again”

        Stop digging Danii. Let it go.
        In case you have forgotten, ask Paul di Resta how much F1 teams like complainers. Not much.

        1. I agree. He was dropped, it was harsh, but he needs to move on! Get his head down and do the talking on the track.

          He seems to forget that the race in which he got RedBulls first podium this year was one which Ricciardo was LEADING before he got a puncture.

          I don’t think Kvyat should have been dropped like he was (despite Verstappen’s lucky win), but I don’t think anyone other than Kvyat thinks he was or is better than Ricciardo.

        2. Ah this comment has made my day. I hated his non stop whining…..

          1. He is out of F1 for next year, he already knows it, they only reason why he stills in Toro Rosso is because he has contract as racing driver to drive for RedBull. Thats the real reason, he knows next year wont be at RedBull so its obvious he wants to make all people know what happens behind RedBull fake smiles and youth “miracolous” drinks for discos.
            Next years his racing seat has already a name on it, it says Pierre Gasly, and he knows it.

            If u want to make a bet, this is the time to bet, otherwise the later u bet for Gasly it will be ridiculous money the one u will get.

      2. Indeed. I felt my heart sink with the title of today’s roundup before even getting to the article. I will have to read it now and hope I feel less worried.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          25th May 2016, 10:44

          The full article isn’t as alarming as many commenters here make it out to be (probably without reading the article first).
          @bascb

          1. Yep, although I hardly am a fan of having them sit down and do their crazy brain storm sometime november or january and come up with a crazy weekend format, Bernie pushing to introduce it immediately (which given the tie ins with hotel rates etc surely should be done well ahead of the calendar being announced!) etc @coldfly, that certainly does not seem to be the main point in the article.

            Potentially they can do a lot of harm, again, but let’s hope they at least have learned it does not make sense to hurry too much in introducing something instead of solidly working out the idea, discussing it with the teams and the races as well as partners like Pirelli (and Tata – get some data available!) before introducing it with a clear timeline.

            1. @bascb @coldfly

              To be honest, even the snippet of comment isn’t that alarming… the race weekend comprises of 5 sessions (P1,P2,P3,Quali,Race) and I think the only reason Qualifying was even mentioned that much was this years hoohaa over it.

              I think they should look at Practice first and work up to the race. I know practice isn’t bad, Quali is good and the Race is a whole different kettle of fish! Work up the scale to get everything how it needs to be.

              What needs to happen is either an extra practice session or an extension where teams have to try out a certain development area (i.e. ground effect downforce, mechanical grip, front wing streamlining). Very defined areas with a way to measure the effectiveness and for the FIA to start building out a mechanical ruleset from this moving forwards.

            2. From most previous discussions they had, I rather got the impression that they are certainly not looking at introducing an EXTRA practice session, but have tended to cut down on sessions instead @captainpie, because having something “competitive” going on is better for the public and on top some of them have been trying to get it down to a 2-3 day race weekend (Friday-Sunday) instead of the current 4-5 days (get ready on wednesday, scrutineering on Thurday, pracice on friday all to be shortened).
              But off course promotors have not been all that happy about those (because of less days meaning shorter stays, which cuts down on expenditure in host cities) tendencies to just shorten the weekend

            3. @bascb

              I think that’s half the problem sadly, if you cut out unlimited testing, reduce pre season testing, have less practice sessions etc you are always going to be limiting development.

              I also understand why they want to do this (costs) so I can’t argue with that either. But if the FIA want to have closer racing they need to normalise the performance between teams, and ensure cars can race and follow closely. To do that you need to develop, and potentially push the teams to develop certain areas to make the racing better – whence my orignal post ;)

    2. Yes it would be no surprise if Mac is already moving on to 2017 in their back room, at least to some degree, given that in the Whiting article it says the new regs for 2017 were based on Mac’s blueprint. Maybe RD feels they have a bit of a head start and hence his comments about being first in ending Merc’s domination.

      Let’s face it, that could be done as soon as next year. Not saying I’d bet on it being Mac, or any team, but nonetheless next year is a bit of a wiping clean the slate. If by the start of next year Honda has a fairly equivalent PU behind that Mac, a Mac that is the basis for the new regs, who knows. Would be great if at least 4 teams are within a shout of each other.

    3. Michael Brown (@)
      25th May 2016, 0:37

      They just can’t keep their hands off qualifying.

      The Russian and Spanish GPs had great qualifying sessions, and it was because of the current format.

      1. It’s not about the qualifying, it’s about the racing. Bernie thinks there should be reversed grids, to guarantee overtaking.

        This year’s new format was a compromise, because the teams don’t want reversed grids.

        What really should be fixed, is aero wake. Some say it’ll get worse next year, others say it will be just like now. And maybe Boulier said it’ll be better.

    4. The best part of F1 today is the FRIGGING QUALIFYING so they can’t stand the idea of just leaving it the hell alone!
      They won’t be happy until they screw that up again.

      1. You know, that is probably why they want to change it. They do not like the idea that qualifying is/can be better than some of the actual racing on raceday.

      2. I hate qualifying as it is.

        The “suspense” of being bottom 5 I’m q1 & q2 is not that great (‘oh it’s Sauber, Renault and Force India again!’)

        Q3 is when cars are supposedly at their fastest is all outlaps, inlaps and a single camera shot of them
        crossing the finish line.

        I would much prefer single lap shoot out for top 10 as Q3. And watch each driver intensely for mistakes and awesome on the limit driving.

        1. True about the coverage of Q3. Most of the time you’re watching the times, not the cars (good practice for when it’s all on Sky in 2018 – why can’t they leave it alone until then?!)

          In the winter Bernie’s often spotted – with Niki Lauda – at World Cup skiing events. You’d think he’d want to use the same one-by-one format for F1. Team bosses will moan about track temperatures but Pirelli (or, hopefully, someone else) can make a qualifying tyre that’s less sensitive to that.

          1. The problem with qualifying one by one is it is inherently unfair.

            The first driver will have the greenest track, the last will have the grippiest surface.
            you cannot take weather into consideration, i.e. Rain happening halfway through the session would ruin it for any driver who hasnt been.
            If the temperature plummets or rises this will affect the run.

            and how do you decide who is first and last etc?
            @bullfrog @tlux

        2. Q3 is when cars are supposedly at their fastest is all outlaps, inlaps and a single camera shot of them
          crossing the finish line.

          Indeed, what really needs to change about qualifying is the TV coverage. At least get a human to do the editing for a change. Preferably someone who knows about F1.

    5. Why change something nobody is asking for?

      1. Because this is F1, where if somethinng ain’t broke, it soon will be.

      2. The most important thing about this is it is Charlie Whiting that is talking about the changes, or rather the detrimental effects of the new aerodynamic rules. Lots of fans have expressed concern about those changes, and how they perceive them as increasing the difficulty for a faster car to overtake a slower one, and there have been comments by people like Pat Symonds and James Allison saying more or less the same thing.
        It is interesting to see that McLaren say the racing will be better, so it will be interesting to watch. I’m not sure what they will do if McLaren are wrong.
        http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/14420391/2017-regulations-result-less-overtaking

        1. @drycrust As it was also reported this week that McLaren expect the new regs to favour them, I expect that McLaren will say whatever it takes to garner support for said regs.

    6. the more things “change”, the more they really stay the same.

      Nothing will change unless someone can challenge the FIA, and thats not happening. There is no competition at the top of motorsports, and the guys at the top will do anything to keep their position. The bigger tires will hit the teams with the most poor fuel economy the hardest, the wider cars will hurt the teams with the most poor aero efficiency/optimization hardest. The poor teams will continue to suffer, the factory teams, and RBR might get something out of it, if they can make their motor. People will stop talking about the mid pack, because like the ‘middle class’ it will evaporate in to pure two class racing, just like MotoGP. The haves (the factories) will never be challenged by the likes of teams like Sauber. Select teams who get better kit from the factories, #1 satellite teams will always beat the nobodys in F1, just like MotoGP. Some teams might fold, others will fall in to line, just like MotoGP. And the circus will continue to go on, the poor will become poorer, the show will become showier, the ‘rich’ will laugh at the masses who continue to promote the hope of better ‘rule’.

      If you want real change, limit turbo boost, drop the initial fuel load limit, allow refuelling, and stop limiting diversity. It’s turning F1 in to a poor ‘monocrop’, which is very unsustainable in the long run. Not with out legislators, subsidies and horrible land practices.

      1. @xsavior
        I think they need to look at ways for Privateer teams to be able to challenge again.

        Don’t forget, Red Bull is considered a private not a factory team, and challenge as well as won WDC/MC’s. so there is a precedent.

        I think one of the easier ways of this is to make more parts common, certain aero points regulation to attempt to normalise performance and push development to break boundaries instead of moving current ones.

        Fuel limit is important as it drives relevancy in road engines, the article on Arstechnica @keithcollantine linked the other day is a shining example of why the efficiency side is important.
        All refuelling will do is add another strategy element which will be figured out in the first 5 races and then have no impact… just more time in the pits as cars refuel, more undercut strategy.

    7. Juan Pablo Heidfeld (@juan-pablo-heidfeld-1)
      25th May 2016, 1:21

      Ricciardo doing a better job than Kvyat last season despite the fact the latter led in points was one of the few areas in which the majority of F1 fans would agree. Kvyat has clearly taken his demotion deeply to heart, if he wants to stay in F1 he needs to knuckle down and make sure he beats Sainz, who proved a match for Verstappen at times. If he doesn’t then I can see this being Kyvat’s last season in F1.

      1. And why shouldn’t he take it to heart? He out scored the man who toppled Seb, secured the teams first podium then got dumped for a hyped up teenager.

        So forgive the guy for feeling aggrieved and disrespected. RedBull has destroyed more driver careers in F1 than they made. For all the talk about RIC, Seb still remains the only successful graduate out of the RedBull driver program, as he’s the only one to win them a title.

        1. He outscored him, he didn’t outperform him. Ricciardo was more unlucky at times and only that enabled Kvyat to beat him. Same goes for all races this year. He might have got them their first podium, that doesn’t change the fact that he underperformed terribly in qualifying and wasn’t anywhere close to being a match in races for Ricciardo either. I don’t think the argument that a driver should be retained on the basis of him having had less bad luck than his team mate is a particularly great one.

          Verstappen is not a “hyped up teenager”. Well, OK, maybe he is, but he is much more than just that. His first weekend in the RBR pretty much vindicated the move in itself. He was closer in qualifying than Kvyat was in 3 out of the 4 first racing weekends, and he kept up with Ricciardo during the race – something Kvyat hasn’t been able to do during the first four races of this season. And those were just his first three days in the car. Meanwhile Kvyat simply got smashed by Sainz.

          As for your second paragraph: at least they actually give drivers a chance in F1 on a regular basis. There’s nothing preventing those drivers to go to other teams, either while driving for STR or after being dropped out of the programme. I VASTLY prefer their way of handling young drivers than, say, Ferrari or McLaren who, combined (!!), have brought exactly 2 of their young drivers to the main team in the last ten years and brought about 4 drivers into F1 in total. And one of those 2 drivers was thrown in the bin after one year. I’m not sure you really want to take up a discussion about teams committing to their young drivers.

          Just look at Vandoorne. 24 and was fully ready to enter F1 two years ago.
          Or look at Frijns. Had he enlisted in the programme, he would have been in F1 now. Possibly at RBR and winning races.

      2. Off course now that its impossible to prove it, Kvyat can say what he want. Who knows, he might have gone on to new highs too @juan-pablo-heidfeld-1. But clearly last year while he ended up ahead on points, there were not many who were convinced he had done a better job.

        I just hope he gets to deliver on his words and impresses, because the spirit we have seen from him since China and even more so since Sochi and being dropped promises that he might be an interesting driver to have around!

        1. Interesting like Maldonado you mean.

          1. not really @johannes. Afterall, Maldonado seemed to never progress over being a talended but raw driver. From him we just got a few flashes of brilliant driving in between making a stupid mistake, or again not admitting his own mistake.
            Despite what Vettel said during the chinese and Russian GP Kvyat is no overly crash prone driver. Kvyat is a completely different driver really. Far less flashy, he seemed rather bland to me until now.

            I am glad we saw a driver (Kvyat) showing a personality, and indeed a resolve to battle on. It makes me feel more interested in seeing him around, and seeing how/whether he delivers.

            1. @bascb @johanness

              I agree that Kvyat up until #kvyatgate was a very uninspiring driver, I was surprised when they moved him up, although understanding they had no choice (promoting Vergne having just dropped him would have been a nice bit of PR….).

              He’s got more personality and passion now, and we’ve only seen one race so I’m very interested to see how the rest of the season goes. But my gut feeling is that he doesn’t have “IT”. The racing instinct and passion that makes a great driver.

            2. He certainly will have some proving to do on track, yes.

    8. Wow, Kvyat’s gone off the deep end now. These kind of circumstances are a good test of character, a test Kvyat is failing.

      Talking on the track mate, what happened to that?

      1. True. I can understand his devastation but he has one, and only one way of salvaging his career and that’s by shutting his mouth, keeping professional and giving it his all for the rest of the season. Right now now he seems too engulfed in self pity, delusion and bitterness and I wonder if he will even see out the season.

    9. Kvyat, you just keep plummeting in my consideration. Honestly, you’ve got to humble up, open your eyes and see. Daniil you were on avg .2 slower than Ricciardo in 2015, only Kimi was further behind Vettel, now in 2016 you were even slower. You got lucky to score more points than Ricciardo, it’s not as if Ricciardo is to blame for not scoring as he should.

      1. But still finished ahead of him in the standings.

        Max was out qualified in Spain by almost half a second. What if he gets out qualified by the same margin as kvyat did this season, are going ignore that just because it’s Max?

        1. Max qualified closer to Ricciardo than Kvyat did in 3 of the first 4 rounds of the season. On average Kvyat has been 0.769s slower in qualifying this year. Max was 0.407 slower. And that was his second day in the car.

          Anyway, as in my post above: he fully matched Ricciardo on race pace and tyre preservation. Kvyat hadn’t done that once this season.

          No, nothing will be ignored. But what is the value of posting hypotheses? I mean, I can post some of those too. For example: what if Kvyat is outqualified and outscored significantly by Sainz? What if Ricciardo is outperformed by Verstappen? What if a dinosaur ate Alonso?

          1. Damn dinosaurs….. @mattds

        2. You can score the gap of Max to Ricciardo in Q3 not knowing the car. Ricciardo went a few steps on the front wing in his Q3 run and that made the difference. Max knows that option but at Toro Rosso it made the car very unpredictable / unstable, so he thought it was not an option. Now he knows, so let’s see Monaco. Learnings steps..

          1. Max not knowing the car I mean

          2. I have also seen people mention that that different setup might have played a role in how they then conserved their tyres during the race, in effect holding Ricciardo from being able to make a two stopper work as well as Verstappen did @maxv

    10. I was halfway through writing about how Kyvat isn’t doing himself any favours with these deluded, bitter comments but then it dawned on me the poor lad has had his entire career and dreams ripped from under him at 22 years old! Maybe his chance came too early or maybe he just didn’t make the grade (most likely) but either way the Red Bull system is so cutthroat. In many ways it’s more undignified that he has to carry on going through the motions for the rest of the season with the junior team knowing fine well that his career in F1 is as good as over. So yeah, if you want to have a moan Daniil you go for it!

      But of course ultimately it’s a results driven business and he at least had his chance.

      1. You don’t think he should have been grateful for the chance in the first place?

        He was given an opportunity that so many dream of, if he didn’t take it with both hands there’s no one else to blame?

        Clearly there’s more to it than we know, possibly his attitude etc.

        1. Absolutely, and I was never one to jump on the ‘Poor Magnussen’ bandwagon after his treatment at Mclaren, he got his chance and didn’t cut it. I think my point is that this scenario was always going to have some kind of bitter backlash from Daniil, they’ve publicly humiliated him 4 races into a season and now he has to spend the rest of the season ‘walking the mile’ all the while journalists constantly asking how he’s feeling. Besides he’s only 22 so again more likely to act petulant. Reb Bull’s decision has been vindicated after 1 race but expecting Daniil to be a good little corporate boy for the rest of the season is unrealistic.

      2. Luke Harrison
        25th May 2016, 21:09

        I don’t agree his career is over.

        Red Bull have prior when it comes to just dropping driver’s completely. They obviously still see something in him – either that, or there’s no one below him they think is worthy

    11. No Daniil, Ricciardo had 4 retirements last year when he was in podium contention. Stats can be deceiving but it’s clear Ricciardo is much much better than you.

    12. How did the last qualy change go over. Do they actually listen to the fans when we say there is nothing wrong with qualy. If the FOM and FIA weren’t a joke before they are now.

      The thing about Dani is that no one was doubting he couldn’t drive. He had the speed to sometimes challenge Riccardo but not the consistency in a world like f1 you can’t be qualifying 15th or any low spot when you are with a top team especially when you are unproven. Yes those comments were a little far fetched but he is 22 and had the best f1 opportunity taken away from him so the fact that he isnt yelling and screaming shows some maturity and professionalism.

    13. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      25th May 2016, 2:05

      Don’t kid yourself Kvyat. You only scored more points than Ricciardo last season because he suffers the majority of the mechanical failures.

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        25th May 2016, 2:05

        *suffered

      2. Well if that’s how you’re going to rationalise it, then the only reason RIC beat Seb in 2014, is because he (Seb) had more reliability and botched strategies compared to RIC.

        Fact of the matter is, reliability issues are all part and parcel of the game, kvyat beat RIC last year and he still has 1 podium to RIC’s none.

        If ROS beats Hamilton this year, are you going to say, “but that’s only because Hamilton had more reliability issues” as well? Or will you disregard that and say he won?

        1. I’m a Vettel fan but even I know that first paragraph is wrong. Ricciardo was the better driver in 2014. Maybe Vettel lost some motivation and/or just couldn’t get to grips with the RB10, but he lost out due to Ricciardo driving better. Even accounting for reliability he wouldn’t have won the duel.

          If Rosberg beats Hamilton, we’ll say both.

          And as above, the argument that a driver should be retained based on the amount of luck he’s had compared to his team mate is a pretty lousy one.

        2. Luke Harrison
          25th May 2016, 21:11

          “If ROS beats Hamilton this year, are you going to say, “but that’s only because Hamilton had more reliability issues” as well? Or will you disregard that and say he won?”

          The former, it appears (especially in the UK) that Rosberg can’t do anything on merit. People’s memories are very short when Hamilton pulls moves that have forced Rosberg into yeilding, but Rosberg should be banned for doing the same thing.

    14. Rain at Monaco? Now we know who’ll be leading for most of the race. The safety car.

      1. haha! Such has become the reality since the crappy Pirelli tyres have come into F1.

        1. @s2g-unit

          That’s got nothing to do with it. It’s a visibility thing, the cars kick up so much water that safety becomes an issue. The last thing we want is a repeat of cars going into the back of each other we saw last weekend.

    15. Dear F1. Stop touching yourself.

      No, seriously, you’re beautiful the way you are.

      1. jimmi cynic
        25th May 2016, 9:09

        COTD!

      2. Oh no, F1 isn’t going to give itself a tattoo is it?

    16. Daniil, I know Red Bull have been mean to you, but can you please shut up. Ricciardo was the superior driver last year and this year, and Kvyat only outscored him last year because he had less mechanical failures than Ricciardo did. Ricciardo would have taken the podium this year instead of Kvyat if it wasn’t for the puncture. Even Verstappen, an 18-year-old, is better than Kvyat.

      F1, please just die. Just kill yourself. Everyone at FOM and FIA have lost the plot.

      1. Oh, come on @ultimateuzair, surely there is no need to call for things like that (your last sentence).

        Most people clearly see how Kvyat ending up on more points was not about their merits as drivers but more about getting less of the race ending issues. I do think that Kvyat showed he was getting into it a bit later last year, and his podium drive in China surely was a good job making the most of the position he found himself in.

        I think its refreshing to see him not sulking away but talking strong. It makes it far more interesting. And I must say it impressed me that he does (up to now he had been rather bland for me), but off course the real talk has to been done on track. I hope we get to see him deliver on that and make it interesting between him and Sainz.

        1. @bascb
          I’m fed up with everyone at the FOM and FIA, including the chipmunk Jean Todt and the midget money-milker Bernie Ecclestone. It’s almost as if they are deliberately doing things like this to annoy the fans. Maybe it is.

          1. I get that, I am not happy with their handling of our sport either. But still, no reason to get into such strong words IMO @ultimateuzair.

            1. Sorry, I just got a little angry. Maybe I went a bit over the top with that. @bascb

    17. When does betting open for what the next completely terrible, absurd idea they implement for qualifying is?

      I am in no way optimistic about the idea of messing around with the weekend format. Maybe to see more action in practice but other than that, nothing needs changing.

      1. @craig-o

        Pairs of cars will be tied together with rope, while the drivers must successfully sing a local folk song as they drive around the lap. Two men will pick the grid by placing names into a hat, but we’ll have a fan vote to see how many entries each driver gets.

        A fan will then be pick randomly from the crowd to drive the pole sitters car for the first three laps, this is to increase fan participation.

        Did I win?

    18. Just shorten qualifying to 5 minutes. This will produce exactly the same results and as much excitment as today. Show some highlights from prior qualifyings in the remaining 55 minutes.

    19. Adam (@rocketpanda)
      25th May 2016, 10:33

      Kvyat, if anyone truly believed that you could beat Ricciardo, then why was it you that was moved to Toro Rosso instead of him?

      If you can beat him, then beat him. Though perhaps you should focus on beating Sainz first?

      1. Sergey Martyn
        26th May 2016, 13:14

        Ricciardo beat Vettel, Kvyat beat Ricciardo, Dr. Marko beat Horner in knee-jerk battle, Max will beat Ricciardo etc. etc. – RedBull circus seems to be a boxing club not the racing team.
        Mad Max Beyond the Thunderdome is the very appropriate movie about RB managing their drivers.

    20. “We will be discussing race weekend formats, among which will be qualifying”

      Are they just trying to p**s the fans off now? After double points and the qualifying farce, why can’t they now just stop f’ing about with the rules. It gets me so mad. Wasn’t the message on the qualifying format clear enough to them?

      But screw the fans, Charlie. What do they matter.

    21. How to make F1 better? It is easy.
      I. Safety II. Close racing III. World’s fastest cars IV. Efficiency V. Optimizing I-IV points.
      1. Less differences between cars in lap time during races. (stable technical rules, no token system, more test)
      2. The sport needs make it easier for cars to follow each other closely during races. Less or same turbulent air and more mechanical grip.
      3. More important role for the drivers. (less radio data from engineers to drivers, drivers manage strategy, it should be more challenging to drive physically and mentally)

      1. @patent Saw your post as soon as I posted mine below. Agree with you.

    22. Interesting how everyone has singled in on one thing, changes to qualifying, without even knowing what that might be.

      Yet Whiting talking the right talk about cars closer together, less affected in dirty air, has been ignored, when that seems overwhelmingly what people want.

      Frankly I would take the worst format on Saturday and live with it, if at the same time we had a much better product on Sunday, and to me that should be the much bigger take-away from the article. Not that a good quali format on Saturday and closer racing on Sunday are mutually exclusive. And even if they don’t quite get that right, I like the talk, and I like the potential these cars will have to be tweaked so that they get to the point of a better mechanical to aero grip ratio.

      Don’t get me wrong, I do think the quali format is fine, buy to me the fix is in closer racing with more drivers with a chance of winning on each given race Sunday, so that worrying about the running order from Saturday’s results isn’t necessary. Ie. They needn’t ‘fix’ both. Just the product for Sunday. And Whiting is talking the right talk for that day at least.

    23. Can everyone please just read the “qualifying changes” article! It barely mentions it, and in fact is a very forward looking conversation piece about the problems in F1, and ideas floating about on how to improve the racing from Charlie Whiting.

      also, this is in planning for potential changes in 2017, hopefully any significant change can be tested properly in the year and a half before it happens….

    Comments are closed.