Head: F1 grids should be reversed
Posted by turkey_machine
From the BBC Sport website: [news.bbc.co.uk]
A radical idea to improve the spectacle of Formula One and make overtaking easier has been proposed by Williams team co-owner Patrick Head.
The veteran says races can be boring and wants the fastest cars to start at the back and the slowest at the front.
"I would like to see the grids in reverse order of championship position," Head told BBC Sport.
"It's the same for everybody, and over a whole season the right guy would still win the championship."
Head, who has been involved in F1 for more than 30 years and is one of the most respected engineers in the sport, feels his idea will "very much upset the purists".
But he said current proposals to facilitate overtaking and improve the spectacle were unlikely to work and urged the FIA, the sport's governing body, to "be a bit more adventurous".
Previous attempts to increase overtaking have failed.
The boldest of those was forbidding refuelling between qualifying and the race.
The move was designed to open up the possibility of positional changes in the race because teams would adopt different strategies.
But, in practice, the strategies of the leading teams do not tend to vary significantly.
Any changing of position that takes place tends to be a result of what happens in the pits not on the track.
For 2009, the FIA has introduced another series of changes to spice up the sport.
These include introducing a "boost" button to provide a brief burst of extra power and changes to the aerodynamics to make it easier for one car to follow another closely.
But Head, speaking ahead of the start of the new season in Australia, says he does not think they will make a big impact.
"If you allow the guys to do all this practice and testing and then you line them up with the fastest at the front and the slowest at the back, why should there be any overtaking?" he said.
"Maybe overtaking will be less difficult, but if a guy is back there because he is 0.3 seconds slower than the car in front, why should he overtake [it]?"
Head admits there would probably be a number of objectors to his idea.
He anticipates some people would want to know how the grid would be formed for the first race of the season.
He also feels some drivers would be upset.
"The fastest might say: 'Well, overtaking is a risk and it puts us more at risk than the guys who don't have to do that'," said Head.
"I'm sure people would complain.
"But I do come across a lot of people who say they like watching motorbikes [more] and I have to say I'm a little bit in that camp because there isn't a lot of overtaking in Formula One.
"What's really boring is if there's a car that is genuinely faster sitting on the tail of the car in front and his race is destroyed.
"We've had some races at Monaco where people have been held up for 30 or 40 laps when they've been a second or two faster than the car in front, and I think that's a pity."
Head's view is largely at odds with that of FIA president Max Mosley, who has in the past likened the strategic complexity of Grands Prix to chess matches.
Mosley admits overtaking is currently a little bit too difficult, but he argues that if it became too easy it would lose its appeal.
Head says his proposal had not come out of the blue and was not motivated by his team's recent fall after dominating F1 in the 1980s and 1990s.
"I've suggested [it] to the FIA in the past and I've made those suggestions at times when Williams have been winning races," he said.
As evidence his proposal would work, Head highlighted the 2005 Japanese Grand Prix, which has been hailed as arguably the greatest single race in F1 history.
The fastest cars qualified well down the field because of a rain shower in qualifying.
The result was a dramatic race that included a number of daring overtaking manoeuvres.
Fernando Alonso passed Michael Schumacher around the outside of a 180mph corner while Kimi Raikkonen eventually claimed victory with a superb overtaking move on the last lap.
Everyone knows that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10; indeed, it's a common requirement in fairy tales. If the human didn't have to overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld
GPGSL S5 Race driver for IED.
A radical idea to improve the spectacle of Formula One and make overtaking easier has been proposed by Williams team co-owner Patrick Head.
The veteran says races can be boring and wants the fastest cars to start at the back and the slowest at the front.
"I would like to see the grids in reverse order of championship position," Head told BBC Sport.
"It's the same for everybody, and over a whole season the right guy would still win the championship."
Head, who has been involved in F1 for more than 30 years and is one of the most respected engineers in the sport, feels his idea will "very much upset the purists".
But he said current proposals to facilitate overtaking and improve the spectacle were unlikely to work and urged the FIA, the sport's governing body, to "be a bit more adventurous".
Previous attempts to increase overtaking have failed.
The boldest of those was forbidding refuelling between qualifying and the race.
The move was designed to open up the possibility of positional changes in the race because teams would adopt different strategies.
But, in practice, the strategies of the leading teams do not tend to vary significantly.
Any changing of position that takes place tends to be a result of what happens in the pits not on the track.
For 2009, the FIA has introduced another series of changes to spice up the sport.
These include introducing a "boost" button to provide a brief burst of extra power and changes to the aerodynamics to make it easier for one car to follow another closely.
But Head, speaking ahead of the start of the new season in Australia, says he does not think they will make a big impact.
"If you allow the guys to do all this practice and testing and then you line them up with the fastest at the front and the slowest at the back, why should there be any overtaking?" he said.
"Maybe overtaking will be less difficult, but if a guy is back there because he is 0.3 seconds slower than the car in front, why should he overtake [it]?"
Head admits there would probably be a number of objectors to his idea.
He anticipates some people would want to know how the grid would be formed for the first race of the season.
He also feels some drivers would be upset.
"The fastest might say: 'Well, overtaking is a risk and it puts us more at risk than the guys who don't have to do that'," said Head.
"I'm sure people would complain.
"But I do come across a lot of people who say they like watching motorbikes [more] and I have to say I'm a little bit in that camp because there isn't a lot of overtaking in Formula One.
"What's really boring is if there's a car that is genuinely faster sitting on the tail of the car in front and his race is destroyed.
"We've had some races at Monaco where people have been held up for 30 or 40 laps when they've been a second or two faster than the car in front, and I think that's a pity."
Head's view is largely at odds with that of FIA president Max Mosley, who has in the past likened the strategic complexity of Grands Prix to chess matches.
Mosley admits overtaking is currently a little bit too difficult, but he argues that if it became too easy it would lose its appeal.
Head says his proposal had not come out of the blue and was not motivated by his team's recent fall after dominating F1 in the 1980s and 1990s.
"I've suggested [it] to the FIA in the past and I've made those suggestions at times when Williams have been winning races," he said.
As evidence his proposal would work, Head highlighted the 2005 Japanese Grand Prix, which has been hailed as arguably the greatest single race in F1 history.
The fastest cars qualified well down the field because of a rain shower in qualifying.
The result was a dramatic race that included a number of daring overtaking manoeuvres.
Fernando Alonso passed Michael Schumacher around the outside of a 180mph corner while Kimi Raikkonen eventually claimed victory with a superb overtaking move on the last lap.
Everyone knows that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10; indeed, it's a common requirement in fairy tales. If the human didn't have to overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld
GPGSL S5 Race driver for IED.
haha
i like this idea a lot, doesnt anyone wonder why we get excited for wet races, as it creates this similar scenario for qualifying.
it would need to be tweaked somehow, but if the first gp was based on a random lottery... or decided by some means of testing every driver using the same vehicle.
and then every race afterwards the grid being decided by the reverse race order. if cars crashed out then the benefit is they start higher up in qualifying next race.
Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it
it would need to be tweaked somehow, but if the first gp was based on a random lottery... or decided by some means of testing every driver using the same vehicle.
and then every race afterwards the grid being decided by the reverse race order. if cars crashed out then the benefit is they start higher up in qualifying next race.
But then qualifying will dissapear, no?
this is just a silly idea. it works for GP2 but F1 should stop copying rubbish ideas from other racing series... night racing... reverse grid... ffs
"I'd much prefer implementing ChampCar's Push To Pass, removing winglets, and allowing all cars under safety to return to the lead lap."
I agree.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2008 04:12PM by Bruninho.
"I'd much prefer implementing ChampCar's Push To Pass, removing winglets, and allowing all cars under safety to return to the lead lap."
I agree.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2008 04:12PM by Bruninho.
hasn't the all cars under safety car return to lead lap already been introduced, as of 2007?
X (@ed24f1)
X (@ed24f1)
As evidence his proposal would work, Head highlighted the 2005 Japanese Grand Prix, which has been hailed as arguably the greatest single race in F1 history.
Generally I see no flaws in his suggestion, but this sentence is bollocks. It was a pretty decent race, but the greatest in history? Pfft.
K*bots UK, specialist providers of 'fun science' Curriculum Enhancement days for Primary and Secondary schools in Britain.
Please find us on [en.wikipedia.org] for more information.
Generally I see no flaws in his suggestion, but this sentence is bollocks. It was a pretty decent race, but the greatest in history? Pfft.
coming from the back of the field in a top car like Raikkonen did several times in 2005 isnt an exciting thing. It would be if Raikkonen was in a Minardi...
They are just using rubbish excuses to complain about the lack of overtaking when the real problem relies in all these excessive aero/winglets/bridges/horns all over the car. 2009 will be better, and no one will complain or ask for this rubbish head's idea again.
They are just using rubbish excuses to complain about the lack of overtaking when the real problem relies in all these excessive aero/winglets/bridges/horns all over the car. 2009 will be better, and no one will complain or ask for this rubbish head's idea again.
I will propose other idea
Lets send the 1990-2007 blueprints to the trash and go back to the 70 models :D
Imagine Raikkonen on a 312 T!
Lets send the 1990-2007 blueprints to the trash and go back to the 70 models :D
Imagine Raikkonen on a 312 T!
I agree- quali should be about deciding which is the fastest car full stop. And to me that means low fuel runs and a driver going balls out!
But I don't mind Head's idea at all actually. Perhaps another benefit would be the odd minnow team nabbing a great result, and with generally the lessor teams being up at the front of the races (at least of the start) they get more exposure and coverage, therefore they can up the cost of their sponsorship, thereby allowing them to actually employ skilled worthy drivers rather than dodgy pay drivers. You know it makes sense
But I don't mind Head's idea at all actually. Perhaps another benefit would be the odd minnow team nabbing a great result, and with generally the lessor teams being up at the front of the races (at least of the start) they get more exposure and coverage, therefore they can up the cost of their sponsorship, thereby allowing them to actually employ skilled worthy drivers rather than dodgy pay drivers. You know it makes sense
Sometimes it is not possible to remove winglets, how fast will the car go? They will be slower then gp2 cars, f1 would stop being the fastest motorsport class, that would me a disaster imo...
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.