Friday, March 10, 2006
# posted by Rich @ 4:31 AM
Controversial essay of the month - March 2006
A regular feature of this blog will be a long essay every month. I wanted to publish the first essay before the first race, so I just managed to squeak it in!
The topic for this month, which may turn out to be very apropos - qualifying:
The first GP that I ever saw was the 1989 Hungarian GP. I was ten years old. Wow, what a race! I couldn't have picked a better race to the first I saw.
What was it that made it such an incredible race? Well if you don't know that, then you are not a true fan of F1! Seriously though, the race was brought to life by the driving of Nigel Mansell, who started from a lowly 12th on the grid (Mansell and the Ferrari team decided to concentrate their efforts on a good race set-up, rather than focusing on qualifying). The result was a spectacular demonstration of overtaking at a circuit - the tortuous Hungaroring - that many considered, like Monaco, almost impossible to overtake at. The greatest overtaking manoeuvre of the day was when the first and second placed pair of Senna and Mansell came across Stefan Johansson's slow Onyx coming out of turn 4. Both Senna and Mansell jinked right, but Mansell kept his foot in, and was slightly quicker to react than Senna. They went three-abreast and Mansell squeezed by around the outside before reaching the uphill left-handed turn 5. It is perhaps one of the most famous overtaking manoeuvres in the history of F1.
Ok, so what is the point of this expatiation? The point is this - how often do you see not only stunning overtaking manoeuvres, but overtaking for the lead anymore. It is a pretty rare sight, right? Oh sure, there have been some examples in recent history (Japan 2005 immediately springs to mind), but they are the exception, rather than the rule.
So here's the multi-million dollar TV revenue question: why? The answer is easy - modern aerodynamics and cornering speeds make it impossible to follow another car closely through high speed corners. A corollary of that argument is that the design of modern F1 circuits is poor, and that they don't promote overtaking. This is the accepted wisdom - wisdom that the FIA has even echoed with their proposals for the Centreline Downwash Generating wing.
And for a large part, the above is true. Except when it isn't!
What do I mean by that statement? Well, consider the following races:
Hungary 1989
Mexico 1990
Belgium 1995
Australia 2005
San Marino 2005
Japan 2005
What do all of these races have in common - they were either won by people who qualified quite low down on the grid, or they were characterised by stunning drives through the field from low qualifying positions. Australia 2005 was a particularly notable example in the latter category because second placed Rubens Barrichello and third placed Fernando Alonso qualified 11th and 13th respectively.
There were three (yes THREE) such races in 2005. This was in spite of the new aero regs. In fact, it can be argued that it was more to do with the engine change penalties than anything else (the "race fuel in qualifying" rule almost always failed to spice things up).
So what's the solution to the current paucity of overtaking in F1? Surely the answer is obvious. Rather than dreaming up curiouser and curiouser qualifying formats, screw the whole thing and hold a lottery.
Let's face it - no-one has come up with a better solution. The qualifying format has been changed 5 times in 6 years (I think - I have lost track quite frankly), and the new shoot-out system has a certain aura of being too complicated to follow. So why not try something really simple?
In fact, there are a number of benefits of a lottery system - eliminating qualifying stresses on the cars would mean better reliability; costs could be reduced; the draw could be televised and generate advertising revenue; the time saved on Saturday can be devoted to more fan oriented activities, such as autograph signings and photo oppotunities. The only drawback I can think of is there is no glory to be had in winning pole position. Another simple solution presents itself - award points for the fastest lap of the race, so that drivers can have their glory AND championship points.
Perhaps the greatest benefit of a lottery system, though, would be that the teams can concentrate on race set-up rather than qualifying set-up, just like Mansell and Ferrari did in 1989. Then, perhaps, we will see some more fantastic races, just like the very first one I saw.
The topic for this month, which may turn out to be very apropos - qualifying:
The first GP that I ever saw was the 1989 Hungarian GP. I was ten years old. Wow, what a race! I couldn't have picked a better race to the first I saw.
What was it that made it such an incredible race? Well if you don't know that, then you are not a true fan of F1! Seriously though, the race was brought to life by the driving of Nigel Mansell, who started from a lowly 12th on the grid (Mansell and the Ferrari team decided to concentrate their efforts on a good race set-up, rather than focusing on qualifying). The result was a spectacular demonstration of overtaking at a circuit - the tortuous Hungaroring - that many considered, like Monaco, almost impossible to overtake at. The greatest overtaking manoeuvre of the day was when the first and second placed pair of Senna and Mansell came across Stefan Johansson's slow Onyx coming out of turn 4. Both Senna and Mansell jinked right, but Mansell kept his foot in, and was slightly quicker to react than Senna. They went three-abreast and Mansell squeezed by around the outside before reaching the uphill left-handed turn 5. It is perhaps one of the most famous overtaking manoeuvres in the history of F1.
Ok, so what is the point of this expatiation? The point is this - how often do you see not only stunning overtaking manoeuvres, but overtaking for the lead anymore. It is a pretty rare sight, right? Oh sure, there have been some examples in recent history (Japan 2005 immediately springs to mind), but they are the exception, rather than the rule.
So here's the multi-million dollar TV revenue question: why? The answer is easy - modern aerodynamics and cornering speeds make it impossible to follow another car closely through high speed corners. A corollary of that argument is that the design of modern F1 circuits is poor, and that they don't promote overtaking. This is the accepted wisdom - wisdom that the FIA has even echoed with their proposals for the Centreline Downwash Generating wing.
And for a large part, the above is true. Except when it isn't!
What do I mean by that statement? Well, consider the following races:
Hungary 1989
Mexico 1990
Belgium 1995
Australia 2005
San Marino 2005
Japan 2005
What do all of these races have in common - they were either won by people who qualified quite low down on the grid, or they were characterised by stunning drives through the field from low qualifying positions. Australia 2005 was a particularly notable example in the latter category because second placed Rubens Barrichello and third placed Fernando Alonso qualified 11th and 13th respectively.
There were three (yes THREE) such races in 2005. This was in spite of the new aero regs. In fact, it can be argued that it was more to do with the engine change penalties than anything else (the "race fuel in qualifying" rule almost always failed to spice things up).
So what's the solution to the current paucity of overtaking in F1? Surely the answer is obvious. Rather than dreaming up curiouser and curiouser qualifying formats, screw the whole thing and hold a lottery.
Let's face it - no-one has come up with a better solution. The qualifying format has been changed 5 times in 6 years (I think - I have lost track quite frankly), and the new shoot-out system has a certain aura of being too complicated to follow. So why not try something really simple?
In fact, there are a number of benefits of a lottery system - eliminating qualifying stresses on the cars would mean better reliability; costs could be reduced; the draw could be televised and generate advertising revenue; the time saved on Saturday can be devoted to more fan oriented activities, such as autograph signings and photo oppotunities. The only drawback I can think of is there is no glory to be had in winning pole position. Another simple solution presents itself - award points for the fastest lap of the race, so that drivers can have their glory AND championship points.
Perhaps the greatest benefit of a lottery system, though, would be that the teams can concentrate on race set-up rather than qualifying set-up, just like Mansell and Ferrari did in 1989. Then, perhaps, we will see some more fantastic races, just like the very first one I saw.
Labels: Formula 1
If the fonts on this page look blocky and naff, it's probably because you are using Internet Explorer, which currently does not display antialiased (cleartype) fonts consistently when alpha transparency is used. I suggest you upgrade to Safari, Camino, Opera, or Firefox. While you're at it, get a Mac.
