Australian Grand Prix 2016, Melbourne - Race 1/21

Blackvault said:
drivers prohibited from throwing visor tear offs/

I didn't know it was illegal but there you go. How are they supposed to remove them then? Do they just need a little bin to put them in once they are done?

The FIA are loosing the plot.
Click to expand...


According to that article it seems it is the teams that raised the issue? Seems reasonable to me. Did you read the article before posting?

There was no official explanation as to why the matter has come up now, but sources have suggested it is related to teams being unhappy about the risk of the tear-off strips getting lodged in car parts and causing problems.

It has been known for the strips to get trapped in brake ducts, in particular, which have been known to have caused cars to retire.

At last year's Spanish Grand Prix, a visor tear-off strip was believed to have caused the brake problems that put Fernando Alonso out of the race.

The stricter enforcement of the regulations means that drivers may now have to carefully place any tear-off strips inside their cockpits - or only have them removed at pitstops.
Click to expand...
 
Skeeter said:
That seems like a deliberately specific and very tenuously relevant set of stats to pull...

Surely the number of different pole sitters is down to the relative performance of the cars and the drivers within that season, rather than the Qualiying format?

2012 had 7 different pole sitters. 1992 had 3.
Click to expand...

In 2014 there were 3 pole sitters and the third man only got 1.

So I will ask you again how does this new format mean anyone but the fastest is not on pole?

The format doesn't seem to shake up the odds, it seems to narrow them down.
 
muon said:
According to that article it seems it is the teams that raised the issue? Seems reasonable to me. Did you read the article before posting?
Click to expand...

Yes I did read the article and yes I agree with what your saying but really what is the driver supposed to with the tear offs then?

Also on a day like today with the farce with the qualifying, Formula One isn't helping itself with enforcing rules like this.
 
Have C4 confirmed anything regarding highlights being on 4od after the event? I've been out all day and hoping to watch the Q highlights at some point this evening before the race highlights tomorrow?
 
The Running Man said:
In 2014 there were 3 pole sitters and the third man only got 1.
Click to expand...

So? I don't see the relevance of randomly picking high/low variation in pole sitters from past seasons has to this discussion? In 1989 there were only 3 pole sitters and the 3rd man only got 1 too. That means nothing.

So I will ask you again how does this new format mean anyone but the fastest is not on pole?

The format doesn't seem to shake up the odds, it seems to narrow them down.
Click to expand...

Which new format? 2006 or 2016? I never claimed it didn't put the fastest on pole? I'm saying you can have fastest in Qualifying and fastest in the Race be very different.

And the 2016 system does shake up the odds as a lot of people were getting 1 run lap per session. That doesn't mean its a good thing.

Your pining for a system we haven't had for 10 years and that almost nobody says they miss.
 
Last edited:
Traditionally Ferrari have faster race pace than quali pace so hopefully tomorrow will be more exciting :D There should be a nice scrap or two in the midfield.
 
Skeeter said:
So? I don't see the relevance of randomly picking high/low variation in pole sitters from past seasons has to this discussion? In 1989 there were only 3 pole sitters and the 3rd man only got 1 too. That means nothing.

Which new format? 2006 or 2016? I never claimed it didn't put the fastest on pole? I'm saying you can have fastest in Qualifying and fastest in the Race be very different.

And the 2016 system does shake up the odds as a lot of people were getting 1 run lap per session. That doesn't mean its a good thing.

Your pining for a system we haven't had for 10 years and that almost nobody says they miss.
Click to expand...

Basically the new system used last year and before had some of the least variable end results.

The 1 hour session had variable results. I a, saying reduce to 30 mins and keep the format of anyone on track at any time.

Only someone artificially trying to introduce excitement that isn't led by the cars would think this is not the best solution.
 
How are you concluding that a 1 hour session where a driver had 4 chances to set their fastest time whenever they wanted, ideally at the peak track conditions, produced more varied results than anything we have had since?

The Running Man said:
Only someone artificially trying to introduce excitement that isn't led by the cars would think this is not the best solution.
Click to expand...

Whats that supposed to mean? Are you saying that anyone who doesn't want the old 1 hour session format is stupid? Or are you saying that we should have a boring yet 'proper' format rather than wanting anything more entertaining to watch that contains anything vaugly artificial? If its the latter, surely you think every car should run the same tyre strategy in the race too, as any variations would be artificial?

I also question what you consider artificial about having 3x ~15 minute sessions? Its no more or less artificial than your 1x 30 minute idea? You have a period of time in which to drive as fast as you can, off you go. If anything the 3 session format is less artificial than your proposal as the drivers aren't limited to how many laps they can do, where as your artificially limiting them to 12.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
So there will be an emergency meeting tomorrow morning with the Teams, FOM and the FIA to decide on the Qualifying rules for the next race onwards.

Bets on them coming out with yet another different set of even more complex regulations rather than reverting to the old system that worked?
Click to expand...

They may well be offered the same option as before, a reverse grid. The farcical one we had today and the reversed grid were the only options offered previously, thus the team managers were forced to opt for the least stupid one. Both are extremely stupid anyway and why the promoters of the f1 races were allowed to have more weight in the changes than the fans, the teams, the engineers and the drivers beggars belief...
 
413x said:
Didn't watch it

For those that did.. If they had unlimited tyres.. Would it work? I liked the sound of it but from reading it seems like same times and running amount were set and that it lacks drama as times are set early
Click to expand...

Nope, it takes to long to do an out lap, flying lap and then pitting lap.

It is just a **** idea from start to finish. Had less track time than the old format.
It will however put more people out of place in races.
I hope that's the last time we see this nonsense but I doubt it.


Laugh at the media saying Ferrari had closed the gap, it was obvious they hadn't.
 
chriscatt said:
They may well be offered the same option as before, a reverse grid. The farcical one we had today and the reversed grid were the only options offered previously, thus the team managers were forced to opt for the least stupid one. Both are extremely stupid anyway and why the promoters of the f1 races were allowed to have more weight in the changes than the fans, the teams, the engineers and the drivers beggars belief...
Click to expand...

They weren't the only options. They were the only suggestions. The option to do nothing and leave qualifying alone was still there.

Basically they spent days agreeing on nothing regarding the 2017 rules, so felt obliged to do "something" to show the fans they weren't incompetent. Unfortunately all they have done is show the fans they are incompetent.
 
Its what toto was saying in a interview I read, there were only two options, whatever happens the solution is so clear, stop trying to slow down faster cars, so the slower ones can catch up, and just give them more mechanical grip. Don't give anyone who has a commercial interest in making more money influence over the racing, oh that'll be bernie. I can see his point though, if there aren't more bums on seats the races will not happen...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom